LIBRARY  OF  THE  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY 

PRINCETON,  N.  J. 

Presented  by 

u 


&etti0n.. 


Division .-O-.v?  /  >C.X.O 

4.K9?5' 

copy  / 


BY  THE  SAME  AUTHOR 

The  Deciding  Voice  of  the  Monuments  in 
Biblical  Criticism. 

An  introduction  to  the  study  and  use  of  Biblical  Archae- 
ology.   8  vo.  pp.  XIV  and  320.    81.65  post-paid. 

Moses  and  the  Momuments;  Light  from  Ar- 
chaeology on  Pentateuchal  Times. 

A  most  convincing  presentation  of  the  Archaeological 
evidence  for  Mosaic  times  as  Pentateuchal  times  and 
times  of  objective  revelation.  8  vo.  pp.  XII  and  278.  pits. 
XVI.    $2.15  post-paid. 

Special  terms  to  Colleges  and  Theological  Seminaries. 


J  A  f\i  i  9 


THE  PROBLEM  OF  THE 
PENTATEUCH 

A  NEW  SOLUTION 

BY 

ARCHAEOLOGICAL  METHODS 


MELVIN  GROVE  KYLE,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

Newburg  Professor  of  Biblical   Theology  and 

Biblical  Archaeology,  Xenia  Theological  Seminary 

University  City,  at  St.  Louis,  Missouri 

Archaeological  Editor  of  the  Sunday  School  Times 
Associate  Editor  of  Bibliotheca  Sacra 


OBERLIN,  OHIO,  U.  S.  A. : 

BIBLIOTHECA  SACRA   COMPANY 

LONDON : 

ROBERT  SCOTT,  PATERNOSTER  ROW 

1920 


COPYRIGHT,   1920 

BY 

BIBLIOTHECA   SACRA   COMPANY 

OBERLIN,   OHIO 


Composed  and  Printed  at 

THE  ALDINE  PUBLISHING  HOUSE 

Xenia,   Ohio,  U.  S.   A. 


TO 

ALL    MY   COLLEAGUES,    THE   TRUTH    SEEKERS 

THESE  INVESTIGATIONS  ARE  DEDICATED 

AND 

SUBMITTED 


CONTENTS 

Preface  xiii 

Introduction  xv 

(1)  The  importance  of  considering  first  things  first  in  the 

Pentateuchal  Problem 

(2)  The  first  thing  in  the  Pentateuchal  Problem;  the  Liter- 

ary Form  of  the  Pentateuch 

(3)  The  Method  of  the  Solution  of  the  Pentateuchal  Prob- 

lem a  posteriori 

(4)  The  Method  of  this  book:  at  the  outset  no  theory,  only 

facts,  a  solution  by  facts;  archaeological  rather  than 
critical ;  in  the  natural  order  of  the  Investigations,  in 
the  attitude  of  dc  novo  investigation 

Chapter  I 

FIRST  INVESTIGATION  1 

A  Survey  of  the  Legal  Terms  in  the  Law-books  of  the 
Pentateuch 

Introductory    thought;    investigation    of    Materials    first,    in 
keeping  with  the  method  of  the  book 

I.  General  Terms 

(1)  Law;  torah,  dhath 

(2)  Words;  debarim,  dabhar,  'imrah 

(3)  Covenant;   Barith,  with  brief  presentation  of  the 

intent  of  the  covenant 

(4)  Testimony;  'edhah,  'edhuth 

II.  Technical  Terms 

(1)  Judgments;  mishpatim 

(2)  Statutes;   khuqqim,  khuqqoth 

(3)  Commandments;  mitsoth 

(4)  Classification    of    all    the    groups    of    laws    with 

associated  narrative  in  the  order  of  the  text 

(5)  Examination  of  peculiarities 

(6)  Possible  exceptions 

(7)  List  of  groups  of  Laws  without  title 

(8)  Complete  classified  catalogue  of  lists  of  laws  with 

or  without  title  in  consecutive  order 

vii 


[ii  CONTENTS 

Chapter  II 

SECOND   INVESTIGATION  93 

Examination  of  the  Different  Literary  Forms  for 

Different  USES  of  the  Various  KINDS  of 

Laws  in  the  Pentateuch 

I.  Mnemonic 

(1)  Discussion 

(2)  Examples 

II.  Descriptive 

(1)  Discussion 

(2)  Examples 

III.  Hortatory 

(1)  Discussion 

(2)  Examples 

Chapter  III 

THIRD  INVESTIGATION  120 

Influence  of  the  Technical  Terms  and  Literary  Forms 
OF  the  Pentateuch  Upon  the  Style  and  Diction 

I,  The  difference  between  Form  and  Style  in  literature 

II.  The  influence  of  Form  in  literature  upon  the  Style 

III.  The   effect   of   the   KINDS    and    USES    of   literature, 

through   the   Forms  which   these   suggest,   upon  the 
Style  and  Vocabulary 

(1)    Subject     (2)    Purpose 

IV.  Summary  of  Results 


Chapter  IV 

FOURTH   INVESTIGATON  130 

A  Comparison  of  the  Divisions  of  the  Pentateuch  Effected 

According  to  KINDS  and  USES  of  Laws  with  the  Divisions 

According  to  the  Documentary  Theory 

I.  The  necessity  of  considering  Deuteronomy  apart  from 
the  other  books  of  the  law  in  this  comparison 

II.  The  Divisions  of  the  Pentateuch  according  to  KINDS 
and  USES  of  Laws. 


CONTENTS 


III.  Divisions   of  the    Pentateuch   according  to   the    Docu- 

mentary Theory 

IV.  Results  of  the  Comparison  of  these  two  sets  of  Divi- 

sions 

(1)  The  Divisions  found  to  be  almost  exactly  iden- 

tical 

(2)  The   Facts   of  the   Pentateuch   furnish    satis- 

factory Solution  of  its  Problem  of  Style  and 
Diction 


Chapter  V 

FIFTH   INVESTIGATION  145 

The  Harmoniousness  of  Style  and  Diction  in  the  Divisions 

OF  THE  Pentateuch  according  to  KINDS  and  USES 

OF  Laws 

I.  This   the   essential   Test  of  this   Solution   of  the    Pen- 
tateuchal  Problem 

11.  The  Harmoniousness  here  substantially  the  same  as  in 
the  Divisions  according  to  the  Documentary  Theory 

III.  The   importance   of  the   whole   question   of   Style   and 

Diction  in  Literary  Criticism 

(1)  The  Elements  of  Style  and  Diction 

(a)  Words  (b)   Phrases  (c)  Arrangement  and 
use  of  words   (d)   Rhetorical  methods 

(2)  Sources  of  Style  and  Diction 

(a)  Authorship  (b)   Subject  (c)   Occasion  and 
purpose   (d)    Medium  of  composition 

(3)  The  Laws  of  Interpretation  of  Style  and  Dic- 

tion 
(a)    Consistency    (b)    Variation    (c)    Equilib- 
rium 

(4)  The  Value  of  the  Results  of  Interpretation  of 

Style  and  Diction 

IV.  Actual  Marks  of  Style  and  Diction  and  Degree  of  Har- 

moniousness in  the  divisions  of  the  Pentateuch  ac- 
cording to  the  KINDS  and  USES  of  Laws 

(1)  "Genuine   marks   of   Style"  from   the   Oxford 

Hexateuch 

(2)  Additional  characteristics  of  the  Divisions  of 

the  books  of  the  Pentateuch  from  the  Oxford 
Hexateuch 


CONTENTS 

(3)  Additional   marks   of  Style   from  the  various 

Divisions   of   the   books   of   the    Pentateuch 
according  to  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws 

(4)  Additional  Characteristics  of  the  Divisions  of 

the  Pentateuch 

(a)  Genuine  Characteristics  of  "A"  in  "stat- 

ute" portions 

(b)  Characteristics      of     "statute"      portions 

arising  from  Subject  or  Purpose  and 
representing  "A" 

(c)  Characteristics  of  "statute"  portions  aris- 

ing from  the  special  purpose  caljing  for 
Descriptive  language,  representing  "A" 

(d)  Characteristics    of    style    in    "judgment" 

portions  of  the  Pentateuch,  arising  out 
of  the  Subject  and  Purpose  and  not 
representing  "A" 


Chapter  VI 
SIXTH  INVESTIGATION  191 

Complete  Examination  of  the  use  of  the  Technical  Law- 

v^^ORDS  IN  all  the  other  books  of  the  Old  Testament 

I.  The  complete  lists 

II.  The  Significance  for  the  present  Discussion  of  the  use 
of  the  Law-words  throughout  these  other  books  of 
the  Old  Testament 

Chapter  VII 
SEVENTH  INVESTIGATION  216 

Archaeological  Evidence  concerning  Pentateuchal  Times 

I.  Light   from   Archaeology   on   peculiar   words,   phrases, 

and  narratives  in  the  Pentateuch 

II.  Light  from  Archaeology  on  Pentateuchal  Literature 

III.  Light  from   Archaeology  on  the  History  of  Israel  in- 

volved in  the  Pentateuchal  Problems 

IV.  Light    from    Archaeology    on    the    Tabernacle    and    its 

Furniture  and  the  vestments  of  the  Priests 

V.  Light  from  Archaeology  on  questions  of  Eschatology 
in  the  Pentateuch 


CONTENTS  xi 

VI.  Light  from  Archaeology  on  the  Mosaic  System  of  Sac- 
rifices 


Chapter  VIII 

EIGHTH  INVESTIGATION  239 

Detailed  Consideration  of  the  Historical  Difficulties  and 

Discrepancies  of  the  Pentateuch  in  the  Light  of  the 

Facts  of  the  KINDS  and  USES  of  Laws 

I.  General  Consideration  of  the  Conditions  and  Methods 
of  Authorship  in  Pentateuchal  Times  in  Relation  tD 
Apparent  Discrepancies 

II.  Consideration  in  Detail  of  the  Difficulties  and  Discrep- 
ancies Themselves 

(1)  Consideration   of  those   Difficulties   and   Dis- 

crepancies which  are  created  by  the  Docu- 
mentary Theory 

(2)  Consideration  of  the  Difficulties  and  Discrep- 

ancies inherent  in  the  Pentateuchal  Problem 
itself 


Chapter  IX 

NINTH  INVESTIGATION  260 

Concerning  the  Manner  and  Time  of  the  Composition 
of  the  Pentateuch 

Introductory  thought:  The  Difference  between  Theory  as  an 
implement  of  Research  and  Theory  as  the  Result  of  Research. 

I.  The  Documentary  Theory  concerning  the  Composition 
of  the  Pentateuch 

(1)  Concerning  the  Time 

(2)  Concerning  the  Manner 

II.  The  Facts  of  the  Pentateuch  itself  concerning  its  own 
composition 

(1)  Concerning  the  Manner 

(a)  Moses  first  a  Speaking  Prophet 

(b)  Moses  also  afterwards  a  Writing  Prophet 

(c)  The  Law-books  of  the  Pentateuch  Journal- 

istic in  form 

(d)  Fragmentariness  of  Laws  and  Mixture  of 

Laws  with  Narrative  and  the  many 
Repetitions  in  accord  with  the  Condi- 
tions and  Method  of  Compositions 

(2)  Concerning  the  time 


xii  CONTENTS 

Chapter  X 

TENTH  INVESTIGATION  271 

Examination  into  the  Validity  of  Objections  urged  against 
THIS  Solution  of  the  Pentateuchal  Problem 

I.  Not  incumbent  upon  a  Solution  of  the  General  Prob- 
lem of  the  Pentateuch  that  it  solve,  also,  all  detailed 
individual  problems  in  the  Pentateuch 

II.  Consideration    of   objections   that   have    a    right   to    be 
heard 

(1)  That  this  Solution  of  the  Pentateuchal  Prob- 

lem rests  entirely  upon  the  legal  portions  of 
the  Law^-books 

(2)  That  the  assignment  of  the  large  element  of 

narrative  in  the  Law^-books  impairs  the  Re- 
liability of  the  Divisions 

(3)  That  the   Division   according  to   KINDS   and 

USES  of  Laws  does  not  account  for  the  dis- 
criminating use  of  the  Divine  Names 

(4)  That  the  book  of  Genesis  is  entirely  omitted 

from  the  principal  investigation  upon  which 
this  Solution  of  the  Pentateuchal  problem 
rests 

(5)  That  these  facts   developed   in  the  investiga- 

tions are  but  collateral  Facts  of  the  Docu- 
mentary Theory;  i.  e.  JE  from  Legal  writers 
and  P  from  an  Ecclesiastical  writer. 

Conclusion   284 

Index    285 


PREFACE 

The  one  important,  and  most  pleasant,  duty  of  the 
Author  in  the  Preface  to  this  book  is  a  special  acknowl- 
edgment for  assistance  to  which  is  due  much  more 
than  a  library  reference  in  the  text. 

The  chief  materials  of  these  investigations  are 
materials  of  law.  Proper  discrimination  among  them 
demands  legal  lore  and  acumen  of  a  technical  char- 
acter. The  legal  phases  of  the  investigations  have  been 
submitted  to  the  scrutiny  of  that  distinguished  member 
of  the  Philadelphia  bar  and  well  known  man  of  let- 
ters, Samuel  Scoville,  Jr.,  Esquire.  It  has  been  a 
pleasure  to  receive  and  follow  his  advice  in  legal 
phraseology  and  in  difficult  cases  of  discrimination  be- 
tween "judgments"  and  "statutes."  It  is  now  a  pleas- 
ure to  acknowledge  my  great  indebtedness  to  him  and 
to  commit  the  result  of  our  labors  to  those  to  whom 
this  book  is  dedicated,  the  Truth  Seekers. 

M.  G.  Kyle. 

Xenia  Theological  Seminary, 
University  City,  St.  Louis,  Mo.,  1920. 


xni 


INTRODUCTION 

The  Problem  of  the  Pentateuch  has  many  aspects, 
each  of  which  is  much  discussed  and  ofttimes  without 
due  recognition  of  its  relative  importance.  Even  when 
the  essential  relative  importance  of  the  various  ele- 
ments of  this  question  is  taken  into  the  account,  the 
order  in  which  these  elements  should  be  discussed  is 
often  overlooked.  Zealous  disputants  sometimes  press 
for  the  consideration  of  that  particular  phase  of  the 
subject  in  which  they  are  most  interested  oblivious  of 
the  fact,  or  at  least  ignoring  it,  that  some  other  phase 
of  the  subject,  far  less  important  essentially,  should 
be  considered  first.  The  portico  of  a  house  could  hardly 
be  said  to  be  its  most  important  feature,  yet  it  is  most 
fitting  to  enter  into  the  house  by  that  approach.  Some 
people  are  most  deeply  interested  in  the  authorship  of 
the  Pentateuch  and  the  time  of  its  composition,  and 
so,  at  every  mention  of  the  Problem  of  the  Pentateuch, 
thrust  these  questions  into  the  foreground  and  insist 
that  the  whole  discussion  shall  turn  upon  them.  These 
questions  may  be  of  the  first  importance,  but,  whether 
they  are  or  not,  the  approach  to  the  Problem  of  the 
Pentateuch  lies  another  way. 

The  Problem  of  the  Pentateuch  is  not  primarily  con- 
cerning its  author  nor  the  time  of  its  composition,  but 
concerning  its  literary  form,  especially  its  most  puzzl- 
ing peculiarities;  the  fragmentariness  of  the  Law- 
Codes,  the  mingling  together  of  different  kinds  of  laws 

XV 


xvi  INTRODUCTION 

and  their  distribution  through  a  running  narrative, 
the  marked  difference  of  style  and  vocabulary  in  dif- 
ferent parts,  and  the  many  repetitions,  all  of  which  are 
questions  of  rhetoric,  together  with  the  historical  and 
other  difficulties  which  always  appear  upon  any  care- 
ful study  of  the  books  of  the  Law.  These  things  con- 
stitute real  literary  problems  which  must  always  be  a 
source  of  vexation  and  uncertainty  until  they  are 
solved.  The  solution  of  these  questions  will  make  the 
questions  of  authorship  and  time  of  composition  much 
easier,  while  the  exact  determining  of  the  author  and 
the  time  of  composition  would  yet  leave  these  prior, 
and  really  greater,  difficulties  as  perplexing  as  ever. 

So  the  first  interrogative  of  the  Problem  of  the 
Pentateuch  is  not  Who?  nor  When?  but  Why?  The 
clamorous  questions  that  will  not  down  are  Why  the 
f ragmentariness  of  the  Law-Codes  ?  Why  their  mingl- 
ing together  and  their  distribution  throughout  a  run- 
ning narrative,  no  matter  when,  nor  by  whom,  so  ar- 
ranged ?  Why  such  differences  of  style  and  vocabulary 
in  the  different  parts  of  the  Pentateuch?  Why  the 
repetitions  and  the  historical  difficulties  and  other  dis- 
crepancies? These  are  questions  that  have  raised  the 
whole  Pentateuchal  controversy,  have  caused  to  come 
forward  a  multitude  of  proposed  explanations,  and 
have  resulted  at  last  in  the  willing  or  unwilling  per- 
suasion by  many  that  the  Documentary  Theory,  or  at 
least  a  documentary  theory,  is  the  only  solution  of  the 
Pentateuchal  Problem. 

The  solution  of  problems  in  literature,  like  the  solu- 
tion of  problems  in  nature,  but  unlike  the  solution  of 
problems  in  mathematics,  is  usually  not  a  priori  in 
method,  but  nearly  always  a  posteriori.  Theories  do 
help  materially  in  the  solution  of  mathematical  prob- 


INTRODUCTION  xvii 

lems,  v/here  every  possible  solution  is  correct,  and 
human  volition  plays  no  part,  but  they  seldom  avail  so 
much  in  the  solution  of  problems  in  literature  or  of 
problems  in  nature,  where  we  are  not  in  the  realm  of 
the  merely  possible,  but  in  the  realm  of  the  actual,  the 
realm  of  experience. 

The  history  of  literary  theories  is  very  long,  and 
almost  wholly  graveyard  history,  gathered  from  the 
tombstones  of  dead  and  buried  speculations:  such  is 
the  outcome  of  the  a  priori  method  in  the  solution  of 
literary  problems.  On  the  other  hand  the  history  of 
natural  discoveries  and  of  real  literary  discoveries  is 
a  comparatively  short  history,  when  set  over  against 
the  history  of  speculation:  fancy  knows  no  bounds; 
the  realities  of  this  world  are  distinctly  limited. 

It  is  related  that  a  great  physicist  once  asked  a 
physician  why  a  certain  disease  could  not  be  cured. 
"Because,"  said  the  physician,  "there  is  no  chemical 
that  will  dissolve  the  crystals  v/hich  cause  that 
disease."  The  physicist  replied  that  there  surely  must 
be  something  that  would  dissolve  those  crystals.  The 
conversation  was  dropped  there,  but  the  next  morning 
at  the  breakfast  table  the  man  of  science  said,  "I  have 
found  two  chemicals  each  of  which  will  dissolve  those 
crystals."  "You  are  a  genius,"  said  the  physician. 
"Not  at  all,"  replied  the  great  experimentor.  "I  simply 
put  those  crystals  into  every  chemical  in  the  labora- 
tory and  this  morning  they  are  dissolved  in  two  test 
tubes."  In  literature,  as  in  nature,  here  is  the  true 
m.ethod  of  discovery,  the  search  for  all  the  facts.  And 
real  discoveries  in  literature,  like  those  in  the  labora- 
tory or  the  machine-shop,  come  only  occasionally  at 
the  behest  of  suggestions  or  hints,  or  speculations,  but 
usually  as  wholly  unanticipated  surprises. 


XViii  INTRODUCTION 

The  solution  of  the  Problem  of  the  Pentateuch,  a 
literary  problem,  presented  in  the  succeeding  pages  is 
no  exception  to  this  a  posteHori  law  and  method  in 
literary  problems.  There  was  a  vague  suggestion,  a 
suspicion,  no  more,  that  varieties  of  laws  had  some- 
thing to  do  with  the  solution  of  this  problem.  With 
this  in  mind,  the  investigation  of  the  materials  of  the 
Pentateuch  was  begun.  Everything  in  the  Books  of 
the  Law  was  put  into  the  test  tube ;  the  solution  of  the 
problem  appeared  in  the  morning. 

So,  I  have,  at  the  outset,  no  theory  to  present,  but 
only  facts  that  I  have  discovered.  During  the  years 
1914  and  1915,  while  collecting  and  arranging  materials 
from  the  Biblical  text  itself  on  the  subject  of  "Penta- 
teuchal  law"  for  my  classes  in  the  Department  of 
Biblical  Theology  and  Biblical  Archaeology  in  Xenia 
Theological  Seminary,  some  exceedingly  interesting 
facts  came  under  my  notice.  These  facts  were  new  to 
me;  I  did  not  at  that  time  dare  to  suppose  that  they 
were  new  to  all  the  world  of  Old  Testament  critics 
also.  Though  they  were  not  generally  noted  by  critics, 
I  supposed  that  certainly  some  one  must  have  seen  and 
taken  account  of  them.  It  was  not  until  the  Easter 
time  of  1917  that  I  read  before  the  meeting  of  the 
American  Oriental  Society  in  Boston  a  brief  account 
of  these  facts  that  I  had  noticed  and  in  July  of  the 
same  year  published  the  same  account  in  the  Journal 
of  the  American  Society  of  Biblical  Literature  and 
Exegesis.  I  also  published  in  the  Bibliotheca  Sacra  of 
January-April,  1918,  a  longer  statement  of  the  in- 
vestigations with  a  larger  presentation  of  the  evidence 
and  some  discussion  of  difficulties  and  objections.  A 
little  later  also  a  popular  statement  of  the  main  facts 
was  made  to  the  larger  general  reading  public  through 


INTRODUCTION  xix 

the  columns  of  that  popular  religious  weekly,  the  Sun- 
day School  Times. 

Such  interest  was  manifested  in  all  these  brief  con- 
pendiums  of  the  facts  discovered  and  the  evidence  sup- 
porting them  that  I  now  give  all  the  voluminous  evi- 
dence and  the  necessary  discussion  of  the  bearing  of 
the  discovered  facts  upon  the  Problem  of  the  Penta- 
teuch, together  with  some  consideration  of  difficulties 
and  objections,  in  this  volume  for  the  final  judgment 
of  Biblical  scholars. 

It  cannot  escape  notice  that  throughout  the  discus- 
sions of  this  book,  and  most  markedly  in  the  early  in- 
vestigations which  develop  the  fundamental  materials 
upon  which  all  the  discussions  rest,  there  is  the  most 
absolute  and  unquestioning  acceptance  of  the  state- 
ments of  the  books  of  the  Pentateuch  at  their  face 
value.  This  will  doubtless  be  attributed  by  many  to 
the  "prejudices  of  a  traditionalist,"  arising  out  of  a 
pre-supposition  of  the  truthfulness  of  the  statements 
of  Scripture  at  their  face  value.  I  have  no  hesitation 
in  saying  that  I  do  much  prefer,  not  as  a  mere  pre- 
supposition, but  for  what  appear  to  me  good  reasons, 
to  accept  the  statements  of  Scripture  at  their  face  value 
as  the  original  author  intended  them  to  be  received, 
rather  than  to  receive  them  in  some  rearrangement 
acording  to  some  modern  critic's  theory  of  what  they 
ought  to  teach.  But  this  is  not  the  primary  reason  that 
I  have  chosen  to  accept  for  this  investigation  the  state- 
ments of  Scripture  at  their  face  value.  It  is  because 
that  it  is  a  logical  necessity  so  to  do.  It  is  impossible 
to  make  a  new  and  original  investigation  of  any  book, 
unless  the  author's  presentation  of  his  material  be  ac- 
cepted, at  least  tentatively,  as  a  starting-point.  To  do 
otherwise  would  not  be  to  make  an  examination  de 


XX  INTRODUCTION 

novo,  but  to  begin  by  assuming  as  correct,  in  whole  or 
in  part,  the  results  of  some  other  investigation  already 
made.  This  book  proposes  a  new  solution  of  the  Penta- 
teuchal  Problem  and  so  must  begin  at  the  beginning 
by  examining  the  materials  of  the  Pentateuch  in  the 
form  in  which  they  come  to  us. 

Being  primarily  an  archaeologist,  my  method  of 
research  in  this  field  of  criticism  was  archaeological 
rather  than  critical.  The  archaeologist  approaches  a 
mound  of  materials  to  dissect  it  in  an  orderly  fashion, 
sorting  and  classifying  the  materials  as  they  appear, 
taking  final  account  of  his  discoveries  only  when  the 
mound  is  exhausted.  This  was  exactly  the  method  in 
this  study  and  arrangement  of  the  materials  of  the 
Law.  Such  a  method  anticipates  nothing.  Whatever 
anticipations  either  the  workers  or  the  work  its3lf  as 
it  progresses  may  raise  are  laid  aside  and  the  method 
I'Ursued  relentlessly  to  the  end.  Certainly  in  this  case 
the  results  nov/  to  be  presented  were  not  anticipated : 
the  final  result,  and  especially  the  comparison  of  the 
results  obtained  with  the  results  of  the  Documentary 
Theory,  was  as  surprising  to  me  as  it  will  be  to  others. 
Some  of  the  simplest  facts,  also,  brought  out  by  the 
investigations  have  been  most  surprising.  I  have  hard- 
ly yet  persuaded  myself  that  they  have  always  hereto- 
fore escaped  the  notice  of  critics  or  received  only  the 
most  casual  consideration.  And  I  half  anticipate  that 
some  one  will  yet  point  out  that  somewhere  somebody 
did  call  attention  to  them ;  indeed,  occasional  glancing 
notices  of  some  of  them  do  occur  in  critical  works,  as 
will  later  appear.  But  that  they  have  been  generally 
overlooked,  and  that  they  have  been  entirely  ignored 
in  the  great  controversy  that  has  been  raging  about 
the  Pentateuch  is  certain.     There  has  long  continued 


INTRODUCTION  xxi 

the  proverbial  blunder  of  stumbling  over  diamonds 
while  chasing  rainbows. 

I  wish  to  share  the  pleasure  of  discovery  as  much 
as  possible  with  my  readers,  and  so,  to  that  end,  will 
present  this  work  in  the  form  of  the  original  investiga- 
tions in  regular  order,  with  little  or  no  polemic  during 
the  presentation  of  the  facts,  and  anticipating  nothing, 
except  so  much  as  the  analysis  of  a  subject  and  its 
orderly  presentation  necessarily  bears  the  marks  of 
previous  study  that  has  been  completed,  but  allowing 
each  item  of  interest  to  appear  in  its  own  place  and  be 
thus  a  discovery  to  the  reader.  The  comparison  with 
the  results  of  the  Documentary  Theory  which  appeared 
to  me  the  greatest  surprise  of  all,  will  be  presented 
only  at  the  point  at  which  it  appeared  in  the  investiga- 
tions, when  it  will  be  exactly  in  order. 


"Open  Thou  mine  eyes,  that  I  may  behold  the  won- 
ders out  of  Thy  law."— Psalm  CXIX:18. 


Chapter  I 
FIRST  INVESTIGATION 

Legal  Terms  in  the  Pentateuch 

An  archaeological  investigation  is  essentially  an  in- 
vestigation of  materials;  until  such  investigation  is 
made  the  archaeologist  has  nothing  else  to  investigate. 
Only  when  he  has  the  materials  thoroughly  in  hand  is 
he  ready  to  investigate  the  relation  of  one  part  to  an- 
other, to  the  whole,  and  to  other  things,  and  so  reach 
conclusions.  As  the  archaeological  method  is  used  in 
these  investigations,  they  likewise  begin  with  several 
inquiries  concerning  the  materials  of  the  Law.  Only 
when  these  are  finished  may  criticism  properly  begin 
v/ith  the  examination  of  the  relation  of  the  various 
parts  of  the  materials  of  the  Law  to  each  other  and  to 
the  whole  Law,  to  the  Pentateuchal  narrative,  and, 
finally,  to  the  whole  Old  Testament. 

To  begin  at  the  very  beginning  of  the  examination  of 
the  materials  of  the  Law,  the  first  investigation  is  con- 
cerning Legal  Terms  in  the  Pentateuch,  noted  and 
listed  and  defined  from  the  text  itself,  and  any  peculiar 
significance  of  such  terms  accurately  determined  from 
the  examination  of  every  instance  of  their  use  in  the 
Pentateuch. 

I.    GENERAL  TERMS 

Even  the  most  cursory  reading  of  the  Pentateuch 
1 


2  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

leaves  more  or  less  deeply  impressed  upon  the  mind 
certain  words  used  to  denote  the  Law  or  portions  of  it. 
Descriptive  words  these  are  in  the  Hebrew,  though 
their  descriptive  character  is  often  partly  or  even 
wholly  lost  in  the  translation.  It  is  important  that  we 
should  examine  these  descriptive  terms  used  to  denote 
the  Law  to  see  whether  there  may  possibly  be  more 
of  them  than  are  caught  and  retained  by  vague  general 
impressions,  and  whether,  also,  there  may  be  any  legal 
terms  employed  which  have  a  much  more  definite  and 
significant  use  than  is  taught  in  the  general  impression 
with  which  we  are  accustomed  to  rest  satisfied.  It 
takes  the  sharp  scrutiny  of  the  telescope  to  reveal  clear- 
ly all  the  seven  stars  in  the  constellation  of  the  Pleiades. 
Among  the  constellation  of  familiar  terms  by  which 
Law  is  denoted  in  the  Pentateuch  may  it  be  that  some 
have  peculiar  significance  which  only  a  sharper  scrut- 
iny will  reveal?    We  will  see  what  we  shall  see. 

1.  Law.  The  most  familiar  of  the  general  legal 
terms  in  the  Pentateuch  is  the  word  torah,  from  the 
Hebrew  yara,  "to  cast."  The  use  of  this  word  to  de- 
note the  Law  comes  probably  from  the  secondary  sense 
"to  throw  out  the  hand,"  hence,  "to  give  directions," 
therefore,  "a  law."  This  Hebrew  word  is  used  in  the 
Pentateuch  55  times,  with  somewhat  varied  applica- 
tion. 

A.  It  is  sometimes  used  for  a  particular  kind  of  Law. 
It  is  so  used  in  Ex.  XII  :49  of  the  law  of  the  passover ; 
"One  law  shall  be  to  him  that  is  home-born,  and  unto 
the  stranger  that  sojourneth  among  you."  It  is  used 
to  denote  the  law  against  royal  polygamy  and  undue 
wealth:  Deut.  XVII:17-18,  "Neither  shall  he  (the 
King)  multiply  wives  to  himself  that  his  heart  turn 
not  away ;  neither  shall  he  greatly  multiply  to  himself' 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  3 

silver  and  gold.  It  shall  be,  when  he  sitteth  upon  the 
throne  of  his  kingdom,  that  he  shall  write  him  a  copy 
of  this  law  out  of  that  which  is  before  the  priest,  the 
Levites."  It  is  sometimes  used  of  the  Statutes  of  the 
ceremonial  Law,  as  the  law  of  the  burnt-offering  or  of 
the  meat-offering:  Lev.  VI :9  and  14  (Heb.  VI :2  and 
7),  "this  is  the  law  of  the  burnt-offering,"  "and  this  is 
the  law  of  the  meat-offering,"  Cf.  Lev.  VI:  18  and  22 
(Heb.  VI  :11  and  15) .  The  same  use  of  the  word  torah 
for  a  statute  of  the  Ceremonial  Law  is  seen  in  the  law 
of  defilement  by  a  dead  body,  Num.  XIX:  14,  Cf.  21: 
"This  is  the  law  when  a  man  dieth  in  a  tent,  all  that 
comes  into  the  tent  and  all  that  is  in  the  tent  shall  be 
unclean  seven  days." 

B.  Torah  is  also  used  of  any  kind  of  law  or  laws :  Ex. 
XVIII:  16,  "When  they  have  a  matter,  they  come  unto 
me,  and  I  judge  between  one  and  another,  and  I  do 
make  them  know  the  statutes  of  God,  and  his  Laws." 
The  same  use  of  this  word  occurs  in  Ex.  XVIII  :20, 
"And  thou  shalt  teach  them  ordinances  and  laws" ;  and 
also  in  Num.  XV:16,  "One  law  and  only  one  shall  be 
for  you,  and  for  the  stranger  that  sojourneth  with  you." 

C.  Again,  Torah,  law,  is  used  for  the  whole  law  or  a 
large  portion  of  it,  as  in  the  addresses  of  Moses  in 
Deut.  1 :5;  "On  this  side  Jordan,  in  the  land  of  Moab, 
began  Moses  to  declare  this  law";  also,  Deut.  IV:44, 
"And  this  is  the  law  which  Moses  set  before  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel."  The  remainder  of  the  instances  of  the 
use  of  this  word,  Torah,  in  the  Pentateuch  only  serve 
to  illustrate  these  various  meanings  and  need  not  be 
noted  here  (Cf.  Heb.  Concordance). 

Another  Hebrew  word  dhath,  is  translated  "law"  in 
the  Pentateuch.  It  occurs  only  in  Deut.  XXXII  :2, 
where  it  stands  for  the  whole  decalojrue ;  ''And  he  said. 


4  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

'The  Lord  came  from  Sinai,  and  rose  up  from  Mount 
Seir  unto  thee.  He  shined  forth  from  Mount  Paran, 
and  he  came  with  ten  thousand  of  his  saints  from  his 
right  hand  went  a  fiery  law  forth'." 

Still  another  Hebrew  word,  khoq,  ''direction,"  is 
translated  "law"  in  Gen.  XLVH  :26 :  "Joseph  made  it  a 
law  over  the  land  of  Egypt."  The  word  here  refers  not 
to  the  Law,  but  to  the  famine  regulations  promulgated 
by  Joseph.  This  word  is  of  very  frequent  use  in  the 
Pentateuch,  but  is  usually,  and  correctly,  translated 
"statute"  and  would  be  more  correctly  so  translated 
in  this  passage. 

2.  Words.  The  Hebrew  word  dabar,  plural  debarim, 
"words,"  is  another  general  term  used  in  the  Penta- 
teuch to  denote  laws.  It  is  in  the  intensive  sense  of 
"utterances,"  "oracles"  that  it  is  so  used.  Of  this  spe- 
cific use  of  the  word  there  are  32  instances  in  the  Pen- 
tateuch in  reference  to  the  Law  or  to  some  portion  of 
it  (once  the  feminine,  debaroth,  occurs :  Deut,  XXXHI : 
3) .  It  is  applied  especially  to  the  Ten  Commandments. 
The  passage  which  determines  debarim  to  be  used  as  a 
name  for  laws  and  not  in  every  instance  in  its  ordinary 
sense  as  a  common  noun,  i.e.,  the  mere  words  of  speech, 
is  Ex.  XXXIV  :28,  "And  he  wrote  upon  the  tables  the 
words  of  the  covenant,  the  Ten  Commandments,"  Heb., 
"the  Ten  Words."  This  unmistakable  use  of  "words" 
in  the  sense  of  "utterances,"  "oracles,"  as  a  name  for 
laws,  is  repeated  in  Deut.  X:4,  and  once  clearly 
established  in  this  use  is  then  easily  seen,  also,  in  Ex. 
XXIV  :3,  "Moses  came  and  told  the  people  all  the  words 
of  the  Lord,  and  all  the  judgments."  Also  in  Ex. 
XXXIV  :1  and  27. 

A.  Debarim  seems  also  to  be  used  more  generally  of 
many  laws,  as  in  Ex.  XXIV  :4 :  "And  Moses  wrote  all 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  5 

the  words  of  the  Lord."  This  passage  taken  alone  ap- 
pears to  use  debarim  as  a  common  noun,  but  taken  in 
connection  with  verse  3  it  appears  to  be  used  as  a  name 
for  laws  and  to  be  extended  to  include  all  the  laws 
which  God,  up  to  that  time,  had  given  them. 

B.  The  singular,  dabar,  of  this  same  Hebrew  word,  is 
used  a  few  times  to  denote  any  law,  as  in  Deut.  IV  :2 : 
"Ye  shall  not  add  unto  the  word  which  I  command  you, 
neither  shall  ye  diminish  aught  from  it,  that  ye  may 
keep  the  commandments  of  the  Lord  your  God  which  I 
command  you" ;  this  taken  in  connection  with  the  pre- 
ceding verse.  It  is  used  in  the  same  way  in  Num.  XV : 
31.  It  is  used  specifically  of  the  Ten  Commandments 
in  Deut.  V:5:  "I  stood  between  the  Lord  and  you  at 
that  time,  to  show  you  the  word  of  the  Lord:  for  ye 
"  were  afraid  by  reason  of  the  fire,  and  went  not  up  unto 
the  mount."  Also  Deut.  IV:  1-2,  and  Deut.  XXX:  14. 
This  instance  of  the  use  of  the  word,  dabar,  is  an  ap- 
proach to  our  use  of  "word"  in  the  expression  "the 
word  of  God,"  but  is  not  sufficient  to  show  that  such  a 
conception  was  fully  attained  by  the  people  at  so  early 
a  time. 

The  Hebrew  word  imrah,  "word,"  is  used  for  the 
Law  in  the  same  sense  in  one  instance,  Deut.  XXXIII : 
9:  "For  they  observed  thy  word,  and  kept  thy  cove- 
nant." 

3.  Covenant.  The  Hebrew  word  barith,  from  barah, 
"to  cut,"  denoted  a  symbolical  cutting  in  two  parts  of 
the  victims  used  in  the  making  of  an  agreement,  prob- 
ably to  the  end  of  their  sacrifice.  It  came,  by  a  figure 
of  speech,  to  stand  for  the  agreement  itself,  and  so  is 
translated  covenant.  In  its  use  in  the  Pentateuch,  it  is 
a  summarizing  word  which  occurs  30  times  as  a  general 
term  for  the  Law  or  some  part  of  it. 


6  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

The  word  "covenant,"  thus  applied  to  the  Law,  is  the 
most  significant  of  the  descriptive  general  terms  ap- 
plied to  the  Law  in  the  Pentateuch.  It  introduced  the 
idea  that  the  laws  of  God  are  of  the  nature  of  a  cove- 
nant between  the  law-giver  and  his  subjects.  Thus  it, 
of  all  the  terms  for  law,  has  the  deepest  ethical  and 
theological  meaning.  In  primitive  times  the  authority 
of  the  courts,  especially  their  power  to  enforce  author- 
ity, was  not  very  great.  For  that  reason  a  covenant, 
an  actual  agreement  entered  into  by  the  people,  was 
used  to  strengthen  the  compelling  power  of  the  laws. 
The  authority  of  God,  in  itself  considered,  needed  no 
such  fortifying,  but  the  inclination  of  the  people  of 
Israel  at  that  time  near  the  beginning  of  national  life 
might  well  have  need  of  such  stimulus  to  induce  them 
to  obey  the  laws  of  Jehovah.  In  any  case,  the  covenant 
was  used  to  intensify  the  effect  of  the  Pentateuchal 
laws  among  the  people  (Cf.  Wiener,  Bibliotheca  Sacra, 
July,  1919,  p.  454). 

The  use  of  the  covenant  on  this  occasion  and  the 
calling  of  the  Law  a  "covenant"  probably  was  intended, 
also,  and  especially,  to  give  expression  to  the  unique 
way  in  which  these  laws  were  promulgated  and  given 
the  authority  of  God.  Most  of  the  laws  comprised  in 
the  original  Covenant  at  Sinai,  laws  of  property  rights 
and  of  personal  rights,  laws  concerning  murder,  rebel- 
lion, fraud,  and  other  crimes,  had  probably  been,  in 
some  form  at  least,  in  use  among  the  people,  and  were 
known  to  Israel  in  Egypt,  in  the  desert  of  Sinai,  and, 
indeed,  to  the  people  throughout  Bible  lands.  Such 
laws  are  found  among  all  peoples,  in  all  ages,  the  world 
over ;  out  of  the  whole  body  of  existing  laws  these  were 
chosen  and  given  correct  expression  for  use  among 
Israel  and  then,  instead  of  being  left  to  grow  into 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  7 

favor  and  authority  by  long  usage,  as  is  usual  with 
laws,  they  were  given  that  divine  sanction  at  Sinai 
which  promulgated  them  at  once  as  the  laws  of  God, 
and  the  people  themselves  were  called  upon  to  join  in 
a  covenant  as  giving  adherence  to  these  laws,  and  thus 
the  laws  themselves  became  to  them  a  "covenant." 

Thus  God  "gave"  these  laws  as  he  "gave"  the  bow 
in  the  cloud,  and  as  he  gave  the  Ten  Commandments, 
most  of  which  in  some  form  or  other  were  known 
among  men  long  before  he  "gave"  the  laws,  as  parents 
"give"  names  to  their  children  which  names  are  usually 
in  common  use  among  relatives  and  neighbors.  There 
is  no  intimation  in  either  case  that  the  things  "given" 
are  new  things  in  the  world,  but  only  that  they  come 
to  the  recipient  with  the  sanction  and  authority  of  the 
giver  and  to  the  established  purpose  for  which  "given." 
Very  important  consequences  would  naturally  result 
from  this  covenant  form  of  the  laws,  consequences 
which  will  be  brought  out  in  later  investigations  (Of. 
Wiener,  Studies  in  Biblical  Law,  Bib.  Sac,  July  1918). 

A.  In  this  comprehensive  summarizing  sense  of  the 
word  "covenant,"  it  is  applied  first  to  the  Ten  Com- 
mandments ;  Ex.  XXXIV  :28,  "And  he  wrote  upon  the 
tables  all  the  words  of  the  covenant,  the  Ten  Command- 
ments." Also,  Deut.  IV:  13,  "And  he  declared  unto  you 
his  covenant,  which  he  commanded  you  to  perform, 
even  the  Ten  Commandments,  and  to  write  them  upon 
two  tables  of  stone."  Cf .  also,  Deut.  V  :2.  In  Deut.  IX : 
9,  11  and  15,  the  tables  of  the  Law  are  spoken  of  as 
"tables  of  the  covenant."  In  the  expression,  "Ark  of 
the  Covenant,"  Num.  X  :33,  and  many  places,  the  word 
"covenant"  has  reference  to  the  Decalogue  which  was 
kept  within  the  Ark,  but  included,  also,  all  the  laws 
enacted  under  the  covenant  up  to  that  time.     In  the 


8  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

expression,  "blood  of  the  covenant,"  Ex,  XXIV  :8, 
"covenant"  is  again  used  in  the  same  sense ;  the  "blood 
of  the  covenant"  means  the  blood  of  the  sacrifice  with 
which  the  covenant  was  ratified. 

B.  The  word  barith,  "covenant,"  is  also  used  in  the 
Pentateuch  to  denote  the  whole  body  of  laws,  not  only 
these  given  with  the  covenant,  but  also  those  at  any 
time  existing  under  the  covenant.  In  Ex.  XXIV  :7-8,  it 
is  said,  "And  he  took  the  book  of  the  covenant  and  read 
in  the  audience  of  the  people :  and  they  said,  All  that 
the  Lord  hath  said  will  we  do,  and  be  obedient.  And 
Moses  took  the  blood  and  sprinkled  it  upon  the  people, 
and  said,  Behold  the  blood  of  the  covenant,  which  the 
Lord  hath  made  with  you  concerning  all  these  words." 
In  Lev.  XXVI :  15,  it  is  said,  "And  if  ye  shall  despise  my 
statutes,  or  if  your  soul  abhor  my  judgments,  so  that 
ye  will  not  do  all  my  commandments,  but  that  ye  break 
my  covenant,  etc."  Perhaps,  also,  in  Ex.  XXXIV  :4-10, 
the  word  "covenant"  was  intended  to  include  all  the 
laws  made  under  it  at  any  time. 

4  Testimony.  The  Hebrew  word  'edhah,  or  'edhuth, 
is  from  'udh,  "to  turn  back,"  "to  repeat,"  "to  say  over 
and  over  again,"  hence  "to  witness,"  "to  bear  testi- 
mony," and  so  is  correctly  translated  "testimony."  This 
is  another  word  of  deep  ethical  import,  only  less  so 
than  the  word  "Covenant"  among  all  the  words  used 
in  reference  to  the  Law.  It  was  used  to  convey  the 
idea  that  God  in  his  laws  was  a  witness,  a  witness  to 
the  people  concerning  what  ought  to  be  done  or  not 
done  and  a  witness  against  those  who  disobey  the  law. 
It  represents  the  law  as  the  voice  of  God,  as  when 
Christ  said  that  it  was  unnecessary  for  him  to  condemn 
sinners,  for  there  was  one  already  who  condemned 
them,  "even  Moses."    As  the  word  "covenant,"  among 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  9 

the  names  of  the  Law,  suggested  the  moral  obligation 
of  men  to  God,  so  the  word  "testimony"  suggested  the 
conviction  of  sinners.  This  word  occurs  in  reference  to 
the  Law  34  times  in  the  Pentateuch. 

A.  The  word  "Testimony,"  like  the  word  "Covenant," 
is  applied  first  of  all  to  the  Ten  Commandments.  Ex. 
XXV:  16;  "And  thou  shalt  put  into  the  Ark  the  Testi- 
mony which  I  shall  give  them."  Cf.  Ex.  XXV  :21, 
XXXII  :15,  XXXIV  :29,  XL:20,  and  especially  Ex. 
XXXI :18,  last  clause:  "two  tables  of  Testimony, 
tables  of  stone,  written  with  the  finger  of  God." 

As  the  events  on  Mount  Sinai  necessarily  occurred 
before  they  were  recorded  and  the  tables  of  the  Law 
were  renewed  before  the  ark  was  made,  we  find  in  the 
record  an  account  of  the  use  of  this  word  "Testimony" 
in  the  sense  of  "The  Decalogue"  in  the  expression,  "The 
Ark  of  the  Testimony,"  with  an  explanation  of  the 
meaning  of  the  word  testimony ;  Ex.  XXV  :21-22  ;  "And 
in  the  ark  thou  shalt  put  the  testimony  that  I  shall 
give  thee."  Later  in  the  record  it  occurs  many  times 
without  any  explanation.  In  the  expression  "Taber- 
nacle of  the  Testimony,"  the  word  is  probably  used  in 
the  same  sense  in  Num.  1:50  and  53.  It  might  seem 
that  this  expression  used  the  word  in  a  larger  sense 
to  include  all  the  symbolical  representations  of  the 
Tabernacle,  but  the  expression,  "The  veil  of  the  Testi- 
mony," Lev.  XXIV  :3,  makes  very  clear  that  the  only 
reference  in  the  word  in  this  use  was  to  the  "Testi- 
mony" which  was  kept  in  the  Ark  within  the  veil. 

B.  The  word  "testimony"  is  also  used  in  the  plural 
form  to  denote  the  Ten  Commandments,  Deut.  IV  :45 ; 
"These  are  the  testimonies,  and  the  statutes,  and  the 
judgments,  which  Moses  spake  unto  the  children  of 


10  THE    FF.Or.LEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

Israel  after  they  came  forth  out  of  Egypt."  Cf,  also 
Deut.  VI:20. 

C.  Still  again  the  word  "testimony"  in  the  plural,  is 
used  to  denote  some  part  of  the  laws  other  than  the  Ten 
Commandments,  or  the  statutes.  Deut.  VI:  17;  "ye 
shall  diligently  keep  the  commandments  of  the  Lord, 
and  his  testimonies  and  his  statutes  which  he  hath 
commanded  thee." 

5.  Commandments.  The  Hebrew  word  mitsvah, 
plural  mitsoth,  from  tsavah,  to  "command,"  is  of  very 
frequent  use  throughout  the  Old  Testament  and  especi- 
ally in  the  Pentateuch,  where  it  occurs,  in  reference  to 
the  Law,  46  times. 

A.  This  word  is  used  to  denote  the  Decalogue,  Ex. 
XXIV:  12;  "And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses,  come  up  to 
me  into  the  mount,  and  be  there :  and  I  will  give  thee 
tables  of  stone,  and  a  law,  and  commandments  which  I 
have  written :  that  thou  mayest  teach  them."  Cf.  Deut. 
V:31  (Heb.  V:28).  This  use  of  the  word  "command- 
ments" for  the  Decalogue  gave  to  it  a  technical  signi- 
ficance which  will  be  considered  in  the  latter  part  of 
this  chapter. 

B.  The  word  "commandment"  is  also  used  in  a  gen- 
eral, descriptive  sense,  but  v/ithout  technical  signifi- 
cance whatever.  As  such  it  refers  to  any  kind  of  a  law 
or  to  all  laws,  especially  in  reference  to  them  as  enjoin- 
ing moral  obligation.  In  Lev.  XXVII  :34,  the  last  verse 
of  the  book  of  Leviticus,  in  summing  up  all  the  laws 
included  in  those  lists  of  civil,  criminal  and  especially 
ceremonial  laws,  this  word  "commandments"  is 
used :  "These  are  the  commandments  which  the  Lord 
commanded  Israel  for  the  children  of  Israel,  in  Mount 
Sinai."  In  this  way  the  word  is  used  with  great  fre- 
quency in  the  Pentateuch.    Once  it  is  used  in  the  sin- 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  11 

gular  in  the  sense  of  any  law;  Deut.  XVII :20;  once 
also,  as  summarizing  the  whole  law,  Deut.  XXX  :11 ;  Cf. 
Deut.  VIII  :1,  2  and  6;  XXXI  :5. 

This  completes  the  list  of  general  descriptive  terms 
which  are  used  in  the  Pentateuch  to  denote  the  Law 
or  some  portion  of  it.  They  do  not  present  to  us  any 
unusual  aspects  or  seem  to  advance  us  very  much  to- 
wards the  unknown.  The  value  of  the  investigation 
thus  far  pursued  will  only  appear  in  the  contrast  which 
these  words  furnish  to  the  next  class  of  legal  terms  to 
be  examined.  These  general  terms  furnish  comparison 
in  the  investigations  to  follow  which  will  assist  great- 
ly the  differentiation  of  other  legal  terms  and  furnish 
that  element  of  logical  comparison  without  which  de- 
duction is  not  complete. 

II.  TECHNICAL  TERMS 

The  examination  of  the  general  legal  terms  in  the 
Pentateuch  has  given  us  a  broad,  plain  background. 
Against  this  background,  and  in  sharp  contrast  with 
it,  is  to  be  seen  a  small  group  of  technical  legal  terms 
in  the  Pentateuch,  for  the  clear  delimiting  of  which 
the  examination  of  the  general,  descriptive  law  words 
has  prepared  the  way.  All  the  legal  terms  of  the 
Pentateuch  have  heretofore,  in  Pentateuchal  discus- 
sions, been  regarded  as  of  one  kind,  as  being  all  general 
terms  often  interchangeable,  and  so  without  any  very 
exact  discrimination  between  different  kinds  of  laws, 
except  where  some  individual  law,  as  the  "law  of  the 
burnt  offering,"  or  the  "law  of  the  meat  offering"  is 
designated.  Occasional  passing  notice  of  "the  Book 
of  Judgments"  (Oxford  Hexateuch,  I.  p.  Ill),  or  the 
calling  of  some  laws  "technical"  without  making  any 
technical  use  of  them  (Kautzsch) ,  references  which  are 


12  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

not  carried  into  the  analysis  of  the  Pentateuch  or  made 
to  play  any  part  in  the  discussions  of  Pentateuchal  ques- 
tions, do  not  constitute  any  real  exception  to  this  pre- 
ceding statement.  (For  Kautzsch's  utter  lack  of  dis- 
crimination between  technical  terms,  using  "statutes" 
for  "judgments,"  Cf.  Kautzsch,  Literature  of  the  Old 
Testament,  p.  30.) 

A  most  important  fact,  now  to  be  brought  out  in 
these  investigations,  is  that  there  are  in  the  Pentateuch, 
certain  comprehensive  legal  terms,  not  names  of  in- 
dividual laws,  but  names  of  classes  of  laws,  which  are, 
in  the  very  strictest  sense  of  the  word,  technical  legal 
terms.  These  technical  terms  are  used  as  titles  for 
groups  of  laws.  Sometimes  a  technical  title  is  placed 
at  the  beginning  of  a  group  of  laws  which  it  designates, 
sometimes  at  the  end  of  the  group,  and  sometimes  oc- 
curs once,  or  even  several  times,  throughout  the  course 
of  a  group.  Sometimes  a  group  of  laws  is  found  to 
which  no  title  is  given  within  the  group,  but  which, 
after  the  significance  of  these  technical  titles  has  been 
determined,  is  easily  classified  by  comparison  with 
other  groups  which  have  titles.  Sometimes,  also,  a 
long  passage  in  the  Pentateuch  is  made  up  of  several 
different  groups  of  laws  or  a  group  of  several  laws  of 
different  kinds,  each  group  with  its  own  specific  title, 
and,  in  addition,  the  whole  list  of  groups  is  given  a  com- 
prehensive title  including  in  it  two  or  more  of  these 
technical  terms  so  as  to  make  it  applicable  to  the  whole 
complex  group  of  laws,  the  two  or  more  technical  terms 
making  always  a  complete  and  exact  title  for  the  whole 
passage.  Whatever  the  title  or  titles  may  be,  and  wher- 
ever in  the  group,  or  at  the  end  of  several  groups,  they 
may  be  placed,  these  technical  terms  are  used  with 
wonderful  exactness.  They  are  never  used  vaguely  and 
are  not  substituted  for  each  other. 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  13 

We  will  now  examine  such  instances  of  the  use  of 
these  technical  terms  as  will  make  perfectly  clear  their 
technical  character,  and,  at  the  same  time,  bring  out 
their  exact  significance.  Later  in  the  investigations, 
every  instance  of  the  use  of  these  technical  terms 
throughout  the  Pentateuch  will  be  examined  in  order, 
difficulties  and  peculiarities  in  their  use  will  be  dis- 
cussed, and  the  question  of  any  possible  exception  to  the 
technical  use  of  these  terms  in  the  Pentateuch  will  be 
considered,  and  last  of  all,  the  use  of  these  technical 
terms  throughout  the  whole  of  the  Old  Testament  will 
be  determined  by  the  examination  of  every  instance  of 
their  use. 

1.  Judgments.  The  examination  first  of  the  use  of 
the  Hebrew  word  mishpat,  plural  mishpatim,  usually 
translated  "judgments,"  will  best  introduce  us  to  a 
knowledge  of  the  circle  of  technical  legal  terms  used  in 
the  Pentateuch.  These  technical  legal  terms,  like  near- 
ly all  technical  terms  everywhere,  are  used  with  strict 
deference  to  the  meanings  indicated  by  their  etymolo- 
gies. General  terms  may  be  used  loosely,  but  technical 
terms  require  that  words  be  most  definitely  used.  If 
these  words  now  to  be  examined  are  really  technical 
terms,  we  may  expect  to  find  the  etymology  of  each  ac- 
curately significant.  The  investigation  will  show  that 
it  is  so  in  fact. 

This  Hebrew  word  mishpat,  is  from  the  word 
shaphat,  "to  judge."  In  the  plural  form  of  the  noun, 
mishpatim,  in  which  the  word  nearly  always  occurs  in 
the  Pentateuch,  it  means  literally  "judgings."  There 
is  a  wide  and  varied  use  of  this  word  throughout  the 
Old  Testament  including  the  Pentateuch.  The  techni- 
cal use  of  the  word  in  the  Pentateuch  is,  however,  en- 
tirely distinct  from  these  various  uses,  as  will  clearly 


14  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

appear  to  us  now  upon  examination  of  the  evidence. 

The  first  group  of  laws  in  the  Pentateuch  to  which 
this  title  mishpatim,  "judgments,"  is  given  is  found  in 
Ex.  XXI-XXIII  :19.  The  title  is  set  at  the  head  of  the 
group  in  these  words:  "Now  these  are  the  judgments 
which  thou  shalt  set  before  them;"  Ex.  XXI :1.  Fol- 
lowing this  title  are  these  laws : 

Ex.  XXI  :2-6,  Manumission  of  menservants  and  their 
families. 

Ex.  XXI:7-11,  Redemption  of  a  maidservant. 

Ex.  XXI:  12-14,  Homicide  in  different  degrees. 

Ex.  XXI:  15,  Assault  on  a  parent. 

Ex.  XXI:  16,  Kidnapping. 

Ex.  XXI:  17,  Cursing  of  father  or  mother. 

Ex.  XXI:18-19,  Assault. 

Ex.  XXI:20-21,  Homicide  of  a  servant. 

Ex.  XXI:22-25,  Injury  to  a  pregnant  woman  re- 
ceived during  a  quarrel  between  other  persons. 

Ex.  XXI  :26-27,  Mayhem. 

Ex.  XXI  :28-32,  The  law  of  deodands  and  damages, 
accruing  from  injuries  caused  by  domestic 
animals. 

Ex.  XXI:33-34,  The  law  of  negligence. 

Ex.  XXI:35-36,  Injury  of  one  domestic  animal  by 
another. 

Ex.  XXII  :1,  Larceny. 

Ex.  XXII  :2-3,  Killing  of  a  burglar  caught  in  the  act. 

Ex.  XXII  :2-4,  Burglary. 

Ex.  XXII  :5,  Trespass  by  domestic  animals. 

Ex.  XXII  :6,  Negligence  in  regard  to  fire. 

Ex.  XXII  :7-8,  Bailments. 

Ex.  XXII  :9,  Trespass  and  recovery. 

Ex.  XXII:10-13,  Bailments. 

Ex.  XXII:  14-15,  Bailments  of  domestic  animals. 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  15 

Ex.  XXII:16-17,  Seduction. 

Ex.  XXII:  18,  Witchcraft. 

Ex.  XXII:  19,  Bestiality.       ' 

Ex.  XXII  :20,  Impiety  and  the  penalty. 

Ex.  XXII  :21,  Rights  of  aliens. 

Ex.  XXII  :22-24,  Wrongs  to  widows  and  orphans. 

Ex.  XXII  :25-27,  Loans  and  pledges. 

Ex.  XXII  :28,  Contempt. 

Ex.  XXII:29-30,  Tax  laws,  being  laws  concerning 
matters  "one  with  another,"  when  the  other 
party  is  the  community,  the  state. 

Ex.  XXII  :31,  Personal  conduct,  and  food  laws. 

Ex.  XXIII  :1,  Slander  and  perjury. 

Ex.  XXIII  :2,  Riot  and  perversion  of  justice. 

Ex.  XXIII  :3,  Perversion  of  justice  in  behalf  of  the 
poor. 

Ex.  XXIII  :4-5,  Restoration  of  lost  property. 

Ex.  XXIII  :6-9,  Perversion  of  justice. 

Ex.  XXIII  :10-11,  Law  as  to  civil  holidays  (Sabbatic 
year)  a  matter  "one  with  another,"  when  the 
other  party  is  the  state. 

Ex.  XXIII :12,  Law  as  to  civil  holidays  (Sabbath). 

Ex.  XXIII:  13,  Blasphemy. 

Ex.  XXIII :14-17,  Law  as  to  civil  holidays  (Feasts). 

Ex.  XXIII:  18,  Blasphemy. 

Ex.  XXIII:  19,  Perversion. 

A  careful  study  of  this  list  of  judgments  cannot  but 
make  it  plain  to  any  person  that  these  laws  were  not  on 
the  whole,  if  indeed,  in  any  part,  novelties.  They  are 
laws  concerning  events  which  are  all  of  common  oc- 
currence, and,  concerning  most  of  which,  there  are 
laws  among  all  peoples.  There  lay  behind  Israel  cen- 
turies of  life  in  Palestine  and  Egypt  under  highly 
developed  judicial  systems,  some  at  least,  of  the  laws 


16  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

of  Khaummurabi  in  Palestine  and  the  laws  of  Egypt 
in  Egypt,  Following  their  line  of  descent  back  to 
Babylonia  there  is  found  one  of  the  most  wonderfully 
developed  and  systematic  body  of  laws  which  the  world 
has  ever  seen,  and  many  of  these  same  subjects  are 
subjects  of  these  Babylonian  laws  (Lyon,  The  Code 
of  Khammurabi,  Journal  of  the  American  Oriental 
Society,  Vol.  XXV,  p.  248,  265,  1904). 

Thus  the  evident  etymological  meaning  of  the  word 
mishpatim,  "judgments,"  is  here  the  historical  mean- 
ing also. 

These  laws  are  plainly  in  reality  "judgings,"  de- 
cisions of  judges,  which  had  come  to  be  recognized  to 
be  just  and  equitable  and  thus  accepted  as  common 
law.  The  promulgating  of  them  with  the  authority  of 
God  made  them  the  laws  of  God,  but  put  forth 
no  claim  of  novelty  in  them,  exactly  as  the 
Decalogue  is  God's  moral  law,  although  it  announced 
some  things  well  known  before  among  many 
other  peoples,  and  other  things  that  are  eternal  truths. 
God  "gave"  these  laws  exactly  as  he  "gave"  Noah,  for 
a  token,  the  rainbow,  though  it  had  existed  from  the 
creation,  or  as  he  "gave"  to  Abraham,  as  a  token  of 
the  covenant,  circumcision,  already  long  known  among 
the  Egyptians  (Muller,  Egyptological  Researches,  1906, 
pp.  60-62),  and  probably  among  the  Amorites. 

So  these  laws  were,  in  the  main,  "judgings,"  de- 
cisions of  judges,  and  properly  so-called.  They  corre- 
spond very  nearly,  in  this  respect,  to  the  cases  in  the 
"Year  Books,"  in  English  law,  or  to  the  common,  un- 
written law  of  England.  To  this  body  of  common  law, 
corrected  and  given  the  authority  of  God,  were  added  a 
few  other  laws  similar  in  general  character,  but  in- 
tended to  lift  the  common  law  toward  a  higher  moral 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  17 

level.  These  will  appear  later  in  the  examination  of 
the  laws  in  detail. 

The  exact  character  of  these  laws  entitled  "judg- 
ments" appears  very  clearly  from  the  examination  of 
even  this  one  group.  They  are  usually,  though  not  in- 
variably, decisions  of  questions  involving  moral  prin- 
ciples. The  Hebrew  description  of  such  laws  is  quite 
characteristic  in  its  picturesqueness.  In  Deut.  1:16, 
are  these  words :  "And  I  charged  your  judges  at  that 
time  (the  time  of  the  giving  of  the  law)  saying,  hear 
the  causes  between  your  brethren,  and  judge  rightly 
between  every  man  and  his  brother,  and  the  stranger 
that  is  with  him."  This  pleonastic  circumlocution  of 
the  Hebrew,  "every  man  and  his  brother  and  the 
stranger  that  is  with  him,"  is  the  exact  equivalent  of 
our  English  expression,  "one  with  another."  Thus 
"judgings"  were  decisions  in  the  case  of  controversies 
"one  with  another."  They  touched  human  relations 
and  usually  involved  some  particular  moral  considera- 
tion. So  mishpatim,  "judgings,"  "judgments,"  denoted 
not  only  criminal  causes,  but  civil  causes  as  well,  which 
always  imply  some  dispute  between  one  person  and  an- 
other. 

"Judgments,"  i.e.,  decisions  of  judges,  as  defined  in 
the  Pentateuch  itself,  are  given  specifically  the  char- 
acter which  is  perfectly  apparent  from  the  examina- 
tion of  this  list  of  judgments  in  Exodus,  which  we  have 
just  seen.  They  are  in  all  cases  laws  "one  with  an- 
other," either  one  individual  with  another  individual, 
or  an  individual  with  the  congregation,  the  commun- 
ity, or  the  state.  They  are  usually  concerning  things 
right  or  wrong  in  themselves,  mala  in  se,  and,  in  every 
case,  they  were  of  such  matters  as  were  to  be  deter- 
mined by  the  courts. 


18  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

That  cases  for  judgment  were  cases  of  controversy, 
matters  "one  with  another,"  is  confirmed  by  the  state- 
ment of  Deut.  XVII  :8-9 :  "If  there  arise  a  matter  too 
hard  for  thee  in  judgment,  between  blow  and  blow, 
between  plea  and  plea,  or  between  stroke  and  stroke, 
being  matters  of  controversy  within  thy  gates,  then 
shalt  thou  arise,  and  get  thee  up  into  the  place  which 
the  Lord  thy  God  shall  choose;  and  thou  shalt  come 
unto  the  priests  the  Levites,  and  unto  the  judge  that 
shall  be  in  those  days,  and  enquire,  and  they  shall  show 
thee  the  sentence  and  judgment."  That  "judgments" 
were  administered  by  judges  is  also  confirmed  distinct- 
ly not  only  by  the  expression  just  quoted,  Deut.  XVII : 
9;  "Unto  the  judge  that  shall  be  in  those  days,"  but 
more  categorically  in  the  words,  Deut.  XVI:18-19; 
"Judges  and  officers  shalt  thou  make  thee  in  all  thy 
gates,  which  the  Lord  thy  God  giveth  thee,  throughout 
thy  tribes  and  they  shall  judge  the  people  with  just 
judgment;  Thou  shalt  not  wrest  judgment,  thou  shalt 
not  respect  persons,  neither  take  a  gift;  for  a  gift 
doth  blind  the  eyes  of  the  wise,  and  pervert  the  words 
of  the  righteous." 

There  was  even  a  system  of  courts  to  deal  with  causes 
for  "judgment."  If  "judgment"  was  not  satisfactory 
in  the  common  court  before  the  judge,  where  cases  were 
first  to  be  tried,  then  appeal  might  be  taken  to  another 
judge  of  a  higher  court.  In  Deut.  XVII  :8-13,  there  is 
provision  for  such  an  appellate  court.  Such  appeal 
was  to  be  only  in  causes  "too  hard  for  thee  in  judg- 
ment." The  decision  of  the  judge  in  the  higher  court 
was  to  be  final.  It  was  the  supreme  court ;  "And  thou 
shalt  do  according  to  the  sentence,  which  they  of  that 
place  which  the  Lord  shall  choose  shall  show  thee,  and 
thou  shalt  observe  to  do  according  to  all  that  they  in- 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  19 

form  thee ;  according  to  every  sentence  of  the  law  which 
they  shall  teach  thee,  and  according  to  the  judgment 
which  they  shall  tell  thee,  thou  shalt  surely  do:  thou 
shalt  not  decline  from  the  sentence  which  they  shall 
show  thee  to  the  right  hand  nor  to  the  left  hand."  Con- 
tumacy toward  the  sentence  of  this  final  court  of  "judg- 
ment" was  punishable  by  death:  "And  the  man  that 
will  do  presumptuously,  and  will  not  hearken  unto  the 
priests  that  stand  to  minister  there  or  to  the  Lord  thy 
God  or  unto  the  judge,  that  man  shall  die ;  and  thou 
shalt  put  away  the  evil  from  Israel." 

This  very  distinct  character  of  the  laws  called  "judg- 
ments," as  indicated  in  the  group  of  laws  cited  above, 
Ex.  XXI-XXIII:19,  and  the  positive  teaching  of  the 
passages  in  the  Pentateuch  that  such  laws  as  are  called 
"judgments"  were  administered  by  the  courts,  indicates 
very  strongly  that  this  word  "judgments"  was  a  techni- 
cal term  used  to  indicate  certainly  a  distinct  kind  of 
laws.  When,  with  this  suggestion  in  mind,  the  use  of 
this  word  "judgments"  as  a  title  of  groups  of  laws 
throughout  the  Pentateuch  is  carefully  observed,  the 
technical  character  of  the  word  is  absolutely  confirmed. 
In  every  instance  where  a  group  of  laws  is  denominated 
"judgments,"  it  is  found,  upon  examination,  that  the 
particular  laws  in  that  group  are  of  the  character  of 
these  laws  in  Ex.  XXI-XXIII  :19,  which  we  have  ex- 
amined in  detail.  If  no  other  legal  term  is  used  in  the 
title  of  the  group,  then  no  other  kind  of  laws  than 
"judgments"  of  this  very  distinct  character  is  to  be 
expected  in  such  group.  If  other  kinds  of  laws  are 
found  in  a  group,  then  some  other  legal  term  or  legal 
terms  in  addition  to  "judgments"  is  also  used  in  the 
title.  In  some  groups  of  laws,  manifestly  of  the  char- 
acter of  the  "judgments,"  no  title  is  given.    But  when 


20  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

all  the  groups  of  laws  entitled  "judgments"  have  been 
examined,  the  distinctive  character  of  such  laws  be- 
comes so  clear,  that  such  groups  are  without  hesitation 
assigned  with  these  groups  of  "judgments."  The  whole 
list  of  groups  of  "judgments"  will  be  given  and  exam- 
ined in  detail  later  in  this  investigation,  after  all  the 
technical  legal  terms  in  the  Pentateuch  have  been  noted 
here  and  their  technical  character  clearly  determined. 

2.  Statutes.  The  Hebrew  word  khoq,  or  feminine, 
khuqqah,  plural,  khuqqim,  is  a  segolate  noun  from  the 
verb  khaqaq,  "to  cut,"  "to  engrave,"  as  "laws,"  "to 
make  a  decree,"  usually  translated  "statute,"  is  an- 
other technical  legal  term  in  the  Pentateuch,  with  a 
meaning  quite  as  distinct  and  discriminating  as  mish- 
patim,  "judgments."  The  words  khoq  and  khuqqah, 
masculine  and  feminine  respectively,  differ  much  in  the 
frequency  of  their  use  respectively  in  the  various  books 
of  the  Bible,  and  are  somtimes  said  to  differ  slightly 
in  their  shade  of  meaning  (Cf,  Hebrew  Lexicon,  Brown, 
Driver  and  Briggs) ,  but  it  is  very  difficult  to  show  any 
constancy  in  such  supposed  shades  of  meaning.  In 
general,  they  are  unquestionably  used  interchangeably. 
The  only  real  difference  that  seems  to  be  permanent  is 
in  a  different  application  of  khoq :  it  is  sometimes  used 
in  the  sense  of  "due"  or  "portion,"  Lev.  VII  :24,  and 
X:14.  In  Deut.  XVIII  :3  mishpat,  "judgment"  is  em- 
ployed in  the  same  sense.  (For  this  reference  I  am  in- 
debted to  Dr.  Finn). 

The  usual  meaning  of  this  word,  whether  in  mascu- 
line or  feminine,  is  "a  decree,"  and  so  "a  statutory  regu- 
lation," or  "direction"  given.  Infringement  of  the 
"statutes"  was  thus  not  a  thing  wrong  in  itself,  mala 
in  se,  as  was  an  infringement  of  the  "judgments,"  but 
wrong  only  because  of  the  "statute,"  mala  prohibita. 


FIRST   INVESTIGATION  21 

As  the  sense  of  the  technical  use  of  the  word  mish- 
patim,  "judgments"  is  clearly  apprehended,  as  denot- 
ing laws  concerning  things  mala  in  se,  and  always  such 
as  were  to  be  administered  by  the  courts,  it  is  at  once 
apparent  that  the  word  "judgments"  cannot  apply  to 
all  the  ordinances  by  which  a  people  is  governed,  that 
there  must  be,  at  least,  one  other  technical  legal  term. 
It  will  be  manifest,  also,  that  most  of  the  ordinances  of 
a  people  which  are  not  "judgments,"  matters  "one  with 
another,"  mala  in  se,  but  belong  to  all  that  class  of 
regulations  and  rules  of  controversy,  laws  concerning 
things  only  mala  prohihita,  which  are  found  in  any 
well  ordered  government,  fall  into  another  class  by 
themselves,  and  are  most  accurately  described  by  this 
word  khuqqim,  meaning  "statutory  regulations,"  and 
so  is  correctly  translated  "statutes." 

The  distinctive  character  of  the  "statutes,"  when 
thus  pointed  out,  is  at  once  recognized  as  so  familiar 
that  it  almost  seems  superfluous  to  give  examples  of 
that  character;  they  spring  to  mind  in  a  multitude. 
Some  of  the  most  conspicuous  and  familiar  examples 
of  "statutes"  are  the  following : 

Lev.  1 :3-17,  The  law  of  the  Burnt  Offering. 

Lev.  11:1-3,  The  law  of  the  Meat  Offering. 

Lev.  II  :4-16,  The  law  of  Oblations." 

Lev.  111:1-17,  Oblation  of  the  sacrifice  of  a  Peace 
Offering. 

Lev.  IV:  1-12,  Law  of  Sin  Offering  of  ignorance,  of 
the  individual. 

Lev.  IV:13-21,  Law  of  Sin  Offering,  of  the  whole 
congregation. 

Lev.  IV  :22-26,  Law  of  Sin  Offering,  of  the  ruler. 

Lev.  IV:27-35,  Law  of  Sin  Offering,  of  the  common 
people. 


22  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

Lev.  V:l-19,  Law  of  the  Trespass  Offering,  for  con- 
cealing guilty  knowledge,  for  touching  an  un- 
clean thing,  in  making  an  oath,  in  sacrilege,  and 
in  sins  of  ignorance. 

Lev.  VI:  1-13,  Law  of  the  Trespass  and  Burnt  Of- 
ferings. 

Lev.  VI :  14-23,  Law  of  the  Meat  Offering. 

Lev.  VI  :24-30,  Law  of  the  Sin  Offering. 

Lev.  VII:  1-27,  Law  of  the  Trespass  Offering. 

Lev.  VII :  28-34,  Law  of  the  Peace  Offering. 

Lev.  VII  :35-36,  Law  of  the  Portion  of  the  Priests. 

Careful  examination  of  these  passages  just  cited 
makes  the  character  of  the  "statutes"  clear  beyond  any 
question,  and  the  uniformity  with  which  it  is  used 
makes  equally  plain  its  technical  use.  From  the  mean- 
ing of  this  word  "statutes,"  it  is  to  be  expected  that  it 
will  be  applied  to  all  kinds  of  "regulations";  and,  in 
fact,  it  is  found  in  the  Pentateuch  applied  to  many  dif- 
ferent kinds  of  "regulations"  and  "directions."  It  is 
applied  especially  to  laws  of  procedure  of  every  sort, 
particularly  religious  procedure,  in  the  regulations  of 
the  Ceremonial  Law  (Cf.  p.  20  for  further  character- 
istics of  "Statutes").  In  uniformity  of  use,  the  word 
"statutes"  corresponds  very  closely  to  the  word  "judg- 
ments," as  will  be  seen  later  in  this  investigation. 

The  examination  of  the  preceding  lists  of  "judg- 
ments" and  "statutes"  makes  very  clear  the  peculiar 
character  of  "statutes"  as  "directions"  concerning 
things  not  familiar,  and  not  to  be  known  as  duty,  ex- 
cept by  the  "statute."  This  characteristic  stands  out 
in  marked  contrast  to  the  peculiarities  of  the  "judg- 
ments," which  were  familiar  as  well  known  decisions 
of  judges,  and  recognized  at  once  on  general  principles 
of  justice  and  equity. 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  23 

There  are,  also,  in  addition  to  the  general  evidence 
from  these  long  lists  of  "statutes,"  some  special  pas- 
sages which  make  emphatic,  and,  if  possible,  bring  out 
still  more  clearly  the  distinction  between  "judgments" 
and  "statutes."  It  will  be  well  to  notice  some  of  these 
passages  now  before  going  on  to  the  consideration  of 
the  one  remaining  technical  legal  term  in  the  Penta- 
teuch, not  only  that  the  line  of  differentiation  between 
"judgments"  and  "statutes"  may  be  sharper  to  our 
vision,  but  that  the  peculiar  relation  of  the  remaining 
legal  term  to  one  of  these  may  be  more  clearly  dis- 
cerned. 

In  Lev.  X:ll,  in  the  absolute  prohibition  of  the  use 
of  wine  or  strong  drink  by  the  priests  at  the  time  of 
administering  in  the  tabernacle  service,  it  is  said,  "And 
that  ye  may  teach  the  children  of  Israel  all  the  statutes 
which  the  Lord  hath  spoken  unto  them  by  the  hand  of 
Moses."  Here  is  a  special  injunction  to  "teach"  "stat- 
utes." It  is  true  that  the  whole  law,  including  the 
"judgments,"  was  to  be  taught,  especially  to  the  rising 
generation.  But  such  a  special  injunction  to  teach  the 
"statutes"  is  closely  observed.  Like  all  special  regula- 
tions of  law-givers,  rules  of  procedure  in  any  case,  i.e., 
"statutes,"  must  be  taught;  whereas  "judgments,"  be- 
ing the  ordinary  laws  of  conduct  by  which  people  shall 
live  their  lives,  are  well  known  to  people.  People  every- 
where constantly  live  an  illustration  of  this  same  con- 
trast between  "judgments"  and  "statutes"  in  any  well 
regulated  nation  today.  The  citizen  goes  along  his  way 
trying  to  do  what  is  right,  following  the  ordinary  ways 
of  people,  and  having  no  need  to  be  specially  taught  the 
laws  that  apply  to  ordinary  upright  conduct  of  life. 
But,  if  he  have  a  case  in  court,  he  must  hire  a  lawyer 
to  tell  him  how  to  proceed,  or  if  he  have  any  public 


24  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

business  with  the  state,  or  ceremonies  in  the  church,  he 
must  read  over  a  lot  of  directions  and  regulations. 
That  is  to  say,  the  common  citizen  needs  to  be  taught 
"statutes"  of  procedure,  though  he  is  familiar  enough 
with  the  common  laws  of  the  land.  So  Israel  needed 
to  be  specially  taught  "statutes,"  unfamiliar  "direc- 
tions," not  about  things  right  or  wrong  in  themselves, 
but  about  regulations  of  procedure  and  ceremonies  in 
state  and  in  church,  Ex.  XVIII:  16  is  to  the  same  ef- 
fect :  "When  they  have  a  matter,  they  come  unto  me ; 
and  I  judge  between  one  and  another,  and  I  do  make 
them  to  know  the  statutes  of  God,  and  his  laws." 
"Judgments"  were  to  be  applied,  "statutes"  were  to  be 
taught. 

Another  passage,  Deut.  IV:5-6,  makes  still  more 
emphatic  the  moral  distinction  between  "judgments" 
and  "statutes."  In  preparation  for  entrance  into  the 
promised  land,  which  was  then  anticipated  as  just  be- 
fore them,  Moses  gave  this  instruction  and  injunction: 
"Behold,  I  have  taught  you  statutes  and  judgments, 
even  as  the  Lord  my  God  commanded  me,  that  ye  should 
do  so  in  the  land  whither  ye  go  to  possess  it.  Keep 
therefore,  and  do  them:  for  this  is  your  wisdom  and 
your  understanding  in  the  sight  of  the  nations,  which 
shall  hear  of  these  statutes,  and  say,  surely  this  great 
nation  is  a  wise  and  understanding  people."  Why 
should  the  "nations"  be  expected  to  wonder  at  the 
"statutes,"  though  nothing  is  said  about  their  wonder- 
ing at  the  "judgments."  The  moral  distinction  be- 
tween the  technical  meaning  of  "judgments"  and  "stat- 
utes" is  the  basis  of  the  distinction  in  this  injunction, 
and  is  emphasized  by  it.  A  "judgment"  being  "com- 
mon law,"  in  accord  with  recognized  principles  of  jus- 
tice and  equity,  principles  which  lie  imbedded  in  the 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  25 

human  mind  everywhere  and  secure  the  uniformity  of 
ideas  concerning  justice  found  the  world  over,  would 
be  for  the  most  part  familiar  to  the  "nations,"  and  so 
would  excite  no  "wonder."  But  the  "statutes,"  all  that 
wonderful  ceremonial  system,  the  symbolical  sacri- 
fices and  ceremonies,  and  all  the  religious  and  hygienic 
and  sociological  regulations  of  the  people  of  Israel, 
that  so  marked  them  off  from  the  "nations" 
round  about,  they  would  excite  "wonder."  An 
American  in  Germany  before  the  war  did  not 
feel  strange  or  ignorant  in  the  ordinary  conduct 
of  life,  the  ordinary  application  of  principles  of  justice 
and  right  living  in  matters  civil  and  criminal,  but 
went  quietly  about  his  business  or  his  pleasure  much 
as  in  any  other  civilized  country  without  fear  of  being 
charged  with  violation  of  such  ordinary  laws  of  up- 
right living.  But  he  was  truly  moved  to  "wonder"  at 
the  list  of  things  verhoten,  the  regulations  of  German 
kultur  and  the  marvelous  conventions  of  German  social 
life,  and  had  need  to  give  heed  to  be  "taught"  those 
regulations  carefully,  if  he  wished  to  move  smoothly 
among  the  people  and  avoid  trouble.  Indeed,  a  traveller 
has  something  of  the  same  experience  in  every  land  to 
which  he  goes.  He  "wonders"  at  the  "statutes,"  things 
right  only  because  enjoined  and  things  wrong  only  be- 
cause forbidden,  but  has  little  difficulty  with  the  "judg- 
ments" concerning  things  right  and  wrong  in  them- 
selves. 

The  consideration  of  the  full  extent  of  the  use  of  this 
technical  legal  term,  "statutes,"  as  that  of  the  "judg- 
ments," will  be  deferred  until  the  technical  character 
of  all  the  technical  legal  terms  of  the  Pentateuch  has 
been  established. 

"Difficulties"  have  played  a  large  part  in  Penta- 


26  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

teuchal  discussions.  There  are  "difficulties"  also  in 
the  technical  use  of  these  words  "judgments"  and  "stat- 
utes" which  will  be  considered  after  all  the  technical 
terms  have  been  discovered, 

3.  Commandments.  The  Hebrew  word  mitsvah, 
plural  mitsoth,  "commandments,"  from  tsavah,  "to 
command,"  has  already  been  considered  as  a  general 
descriptive  legal  term.  As  such  it  is  of  very  frequent 
use  in  the  Old  Testament,  especially  in  the  Pentateuch 
and  in  the  Psalms.  When  so  used,  it  has  no  technical 
significance  whatever  and  is  applied  to  any  kind  of  a 
law  or  to  all  laws.  It  indicates,  however,  perhaps  al- 
ways, the  moral  idea  involved  in  obedience  to  a  com- 
mand. The  etymology  of  the  Hebrew  word  mitsoth, 
"Commands,"  requires  this  and  the  circumstances  of 
its  use  sometimes  most  greatly  emphasize  this  moral 
significance;  as  when  Moses,  in  Lev.  XXVII :34  calls 
to  mind  the  solemn  audience  with  the  Almighty  at 
Sinai,  when  amidst  the  awe  of  that  occasion  they 
listened  to  the  laws  promulgated  there,  he  says  to  the 
people :  "These  are  the  commands  which  the  Lord  com- 
manded Moses  for  the  children  of  Israel  at  Mount 
Sinai." 

So  common  is  this  descriptive  use  of  the  word  "com- 
mandments" in  references  to  the  law  in  the  Pentateuch 
and  its  employment  as  a  technical  term  is  comparative- 
ly so  infrequent,  that,  except  for  its  association  with 
the  other  technical  legal  terms,  "judgments"  and  "stat- 
utes," and  its  distinct  differentiation  at  times  from 
them,  it  would  hardly  be  possible  to  recognize  this  as  a 
technical  legal  term  at  all.  Neither  does  its  use  as  a 
technical  term  play  so  important  a  part  as  the  other 
technical  terms.  But  it  plays  a  part,  nevertheless,  and 
completeness  of  the  investigation  requires  that  its  use 
be  noted. 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  27 

The  technical  significance  of  this  word  "command- 
ments" is  always  employed  to  denote  specifically  those 
most  fundamental  laws  called  the  Ten  Commandments. 
Neither  of  the  technical  legal  terms,  "judgments," 
"statutes,"  nor  "commandments"  corresponds  exactly 
to  any  particular  class  of  laws  among  us,  but  the  word 
"commandments"  in  its  technical  use  for  the  Decalogue 
corresponds  somewhat  closely  to  the  fundamental  laws 
of  modern  peoples,  the  Magna  Charta  of  England,  and 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  of  America. 
"Judgments"  corresponds  nearly  to  the  Common  Law 
of  England  and  "statutes"  covers  nearly  the  same  sub- 
jects as  laws  of  procedure  in  legal  matters  and  the 
rubrics  in  the  English  prayer  Book,  and  as  do  the  mis- 
cellaneous laws  of  procedure  enacted  by  the  various 
law-making  bodies  of  Church  and  State  in  America. 

The  word  mitsoth,  "commandments"  occurs  in  the 
technical  sense  in  Lev.  XXVI:  14-16:  "And  if  you  will 
not  hearken  unto  me,  and  will  not  do  all  these  com- 
mandments, and  that  ye  shall  despise  my  statutes,  or 
if  your  soul  abhor  my  judgments,  so  that  ye  will  not 
do  all  my  commandments,  but  that  ye  break  my  cove- 
nant, I  also  will  do  this  unto  you,  etc."  The  first  oc- 
currence of  the  word  "commandments"  in  this  pas- 
sage is  undoubtedly  in  the  general  descriptive  sense,  but 
the  second  occurrence  of  it,  "so  that  ye  will  not  do  all 
my  commandments,"  after  the  mention  of  "statutes" 
and  "judgments,"  seems  to  demand  that  it  be  used  in 
the  technical  sense  of  the  Decalogue,  and  then  it  is 
immediately  so  defined  by  the  positively  differentiat- 
ing clause,  "that  ye  break  my  Covenant."  There  is 
more  frequent  use  of  this  word  "commandments"  in 
the  technical  sense  in  reference  to  the  Law  given  in  the 
speeches  of  Moses  in  Deuteronomy,  in  distinction  from 


28  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

the  "judgments"  and  the  "statutes."  When  clearly  seen 
in  such  contrast,  there  are  a  number  of  other  places  in 
which  it  is  used  without  this  comparison,  in  which  it 
seems  most  probably,  and  in  some  instances  certainly, 
to  be  used  also  in  the  technical  sense.  In  Deut.  V:31 
Heb.  V:28)  in  the  description  of  the  giving  of  the  Law 
at  Sinai,  God  says  to  Moses:  "But  as  for  thee,  stand 
thou  here  by  me,  and  I  will  speak  unto  thee  of  the 
commandments  and  the  statutes  and  the  judgments, 
which  thou  shalt  teach  them,  that  they  may  do  them  in 
the  land  which  I  give  unto  them  to  possess  it."  In 
Deut.  VI :1,  Moses  says:  "Now  these  are  the  command- 
ments, and  the  statutes,  and  the  judgments,  which  the 
Lord  your  God  commanded  to  teach  you,  that  ye  might 
do  them  in  the  land  whither  ye  go  to  possess  it."  In 
Deut.  VII :11  Moses  again  says:  "Thou  shalt  therefore 
keep  the  commandments,  and  the  statutes,  and  the 
judgments,  which  I  command  thee  this  day  to  do  them." 
Like  use  of  the  word  "commandments"  in  sharp  con- 
trast with  the  "statutes"  and  the  "judgments"  occurs 
also  in  Deut.  VIII  :11,  XI  :1,  XXVI  :17,  and  XXX  :16. 
In  Lev.  XXVII :  34,  "commandments"  evidently  refers 
as  a  general  term  to  all  the  laws  given  at  Sinai.  The 
commandments  of  the  Decalogue  were  moral  laws  and 
cases  of  violation  of  them  were  dealt  with  by  the  judges 
of  the  courts.  Indeed  the  second  table  of  the  Law 
dealt  most  specifically  with  questions  "one  with  an- 
other." Thus  the  "commandments"  were  of  the  same 
general  character  as  the  "judgments,"  and,  for  this 
reason,  the  determining  of  the  technical  character  of 
the  term  "commandments"  is  not  assisted  by  any  dis- 
tinctive essential  character  as  is  the  case  with  the 
"judgments"  and  the  "statutes."  So  it  happens,  as  was 
remarked  above,  that  the  technical  use  of  this  word  is 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  29 

not  so  marked  as  is  the  technical  use  of  the  other  two 
technical  legal  terms.  Nothwithstanding  this,  the  use 
of  the  word  "commandments"  in  contrast  with  "judg- 
ments" and  "statutes,"  and  thus  sharply  differentia- 
ting it  from  them,  proves  that  at  such  time  it  meant 
specifically  and  technically  the  Decalogue, 

The  technical  use  of  this  word  mitsoth  thus  once 
established,  there  are  found  a  number  of  places  in  Exo- 
dus, Leviticus  and  Numbers,  in  which  only  this  legal 
term  is  used  or  it  is  used  in  connection  with  only  one 
other  legal  term,  which  appear  most  probably,  in  some 
instances  we  may  say  certainly,  to  use  "command- 
ments" in  the  technical  sense.  The  first  of  these  pas- 
sages is  in  the  Decalogue  itself,  Ex.  XX  :6.  The  second 
commandment  closes  with  these  words:  "and  show 
mercy  unto  thousands  of  them  that  love  me  and  keep 
my  commandments."  The  probability  that  the  word 
"commandments"  is  here  in  the  technical  sense  is  great- 
ly increased  by  several  subsequent  passages,  now  to  be 
quoted,  which  plainly  make  the  Decalogue  the  basis  of 
all  moral  living  and  obedience.  In  Ex.  XXIV:  12  there 
are  these  words :  "And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses,  come 
up  to  me  into  the  mount,  and  be  there  and  I  will  give 
thee  tables  of  stone,  and  a  law,  and  commandments 
which  I  have  written :  that  thou  mayest  teach  them." 
The  English  revisers  in  the  translation  of  this  passage 
adopted  a  text  which  has  mitsvah,  "commandment," 
with  the  definite  article,  "the  commandment." 

Lev.  IV  :2,  13,  22,  27  present  another  class  of  pas- 
sages, all  very  similar,  which  speak  of  the  offerings  for 
the  sins  of  ignorance  in  which  it  seems  most  probable 
that  the  word  "commandments"  refers  not  to  "judg- 
ments" or  "statutes,"  or  to  any  and  every  kind  of  a  law, 
but  to  the  laws  of  the  Decalogue,  the  Ten  Command- 


30  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

ments  as  the  basis  of  moral  conduct,  the  transgression 
of  which  covers  all  immorality,  for  which  sacrifice  was 
to  be  offered.  The  statement  of  Lev.  IV  :2,  which  is 
typical  of  all  the  passages  in  this  list,  is  as  follows :  "If 
a  soul  shall  sin  through  ignorance  against  any  of  the 
commandments  of  the  Lord  concerning  things  which 
ought  not  to  be  done  and  shall  do  against  any  of  them, 
etc."  In  Num.  XV:22  there  is  a  similar  reference  to 
the  "commandments"  in  speaking  of  sins  of  ignorance; 
and  in  Num.  XV:31,  concerning  sins  of  presumption. 
In  this  latter  case,  the  word  is  mitsvah,  "command- 
ment" in  the  singular,  as  the  transgressor  is  men- 
tioned as  having  sinned  against  one  of  the  command- 
ments. Then  the  children  of  Israel  were  bidden  to  wear 
a  fringe  upon  their  garments  with  a  ribbon  of  blue  as  a 
kind  of  badge  of  loyalty  and  to  "remember  the  com- 
mandments to  do  them,"  Num.  XV:38-40.  In  Num. 
XXXVI:  13,  the  last  verse  in  the  book,  the  word  "com- 
mandments" seems  to  be  used  for  the  Decalogue, 
though  vaguely  through  the  many  references  scattered 
throughout  the  book  to  sins  of  ignorance  and  presump- 
tion which  were  specifically  denominated  sins,  viola- 
tions of  commandments. 

In  Deut.  there  is  quite  a  long  list  of  passages  in 
which  mitsoth,  "commandments,"  is  used  alone  and 
quite  manifestly  in  the  technical  sense.  The  first  of 
these  passages,  Deut.  V:10,  is  again  in  the  second  com- 
mandment of  the  Decalogue,  "showing  mercy  unto 
thousands  of  them  that  love  me  and  keep  my  command- 
ments." Deut.  V:29,  in  the  eloquent  account  of  the 
giving  of  the  Law  at  Sinai,  manifestly  referring  to  the 
commandments  of  the  Decalogue,  are  these  words :  "0 
that  there  were  such  an  heart  in  them,  that  they  would 
fear  me  and  keep  all  my  commandments  always,  that 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  31 

it  might  be  well  with  them,  and  with  their  children  for- 
ever." In  Deut.  VII  :9,  it  is  said :  "Know  therefore  that 
the  Lord  thy  God,  he  is  God  the  faithful  God,  which 
keepeth  covenant  and  mercy  with  them  that  love  him 
and  keep  his  commandments  to  a  thousand  genera- 
tions." This,  also,  certainly  refers  specifically  to  the 
promise  of  the  second  commandment.  Deut.  XI  :8,  13, 
22,  27,  28,  is  a  list  of  passages  all  linked  together  in 
the  narrative  and  all  referring  to  the  Decalogue,  as  is 
indicated  especially  by  XI:13:  "And  it  shall  come  to 
pass,  if  ye  shall  hearken  diligently  unto  my  command- 
ments which  I  command  you  this  day  to  love  the  Lord 
thy  God,  and  to  serve  him  with  all  thy  heart  and  with 
all  thy  soul,  etc."  Another  group  of  passages  includes 
Deut.  XIII  :4  and  XXVI  :18,  in  which  "commandments" 
is  used  alone,  yet  apparently  in  the  technical  sense.  In 
Deut.  XIII  :18,  XV  :5,  and  XXVII  :10,  in  which  the 
phrase  "commandments  which  I  command  thee  this 
day"  occurs,  the  word  "commandments"  is  evidently 
used  in  the  general  sense  to  refer  to  all  the  laws  given 
that  day.  In  XXVI:  18,  the  word  "commandments" 
seems  to  be  used  in  the  general  sense  summing  up  the 
"judgments,"  "statutes"  and  "commandments"  of  the 
preceding  verses. 

This  word  "commandment"  clearly  is  not  so  strictly 
employed  as  a  technical  term  to  denote  certain  laws  as 
are  the  other  technical  terms  in  the  Pentateuch.  "Judg- 
ments" and  "statutes,"  when  used  as  titles  of  groups 
of  laws  in  the  Pentateuch  are  never  used  as  mere  de- 
scriptive terms,  but  always  in  their  technical  sense,  as 
we  shall  presently  see,  when  all  the  groups  of  laws  are 
examined.  The  word  "commandments"  is  very  fre- 
quently used  as  a  general  descriptive  term  in  the  Penta- 
teuch.   It  sometimes  seems  as  if  the  word  was  intended 


32  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

to  denote  anything  of  the  nature  of  a  "judgment," 
which  was  yet  not  a  decision  of  the  judges,  but  a  new 
"judgment"  added  by  the  "commandment"  of  the  Lord. 
A  "commandment"  of  this  kind  was  thus  "a  thing  com- 
manded," i.e.,  given  directly  by  God,  in  distinction  from 
the  other  "judgments"  which  were  "judgings"  ap- 
proved of  God  and  thus  indirectly  "commanded."  Thus 
the  word  "commandments"  was  naturally  used  less  fre- 
quently in  the  technical  sense  than  were  the  other 
technical  terms,  and  often  used  in  the  general  sense  to 
denote  anything  directly  commanded  by  God. 

In  Deut.  VI  :1,  ''Now  these  are  the  commandments 
and  the  statutes  and  the  judgments  which  the  Lord 
hath  commanded  to  teach  you,  that  ye  might  do  them 
in  the  land  whither  ye  go  to  possess  it,"  the  word  "com- 
mandments" is  used  in  the  technical  sense:  while  in 
Deul:.  VI  :2,  "statutes"  and  "commandments"  are  men- 
tioned as  being  both  alike  "commanded,"  though  "judg- 
ments" are  not  so  mentioned.  In  Deut.  XXVI:  13, 
"commandments"  are  specially  emphasized  as  being 
"things  commanded."  Cf.  also,  Deut.  XXVII:  19; 
XXVIII  :15  and  45 ;  XXX  :8.  Once,  Num.  XXXVI  :13, 
"judgments,"  also,  are  said  to  be  "commanded"  :  "These 
are  the  commandments  and  the  judgments,  which  the 
Lord  commanded  by  the  hand  of  Moses  unto  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  in  the  plain  of  Moab  by  Jordan  near 
Jericho."  But  even  in  this  instance  there  is  a  clear 
distinction  between  "judgments"  and  the  other  "com- 
mandments" which  were  "commanded." 

It  must  be  noted,  also,  that  not  only  is  the  word  "com- 
mandments" sometimes  used  as  a  general  law  term, 
and  used  to  denote  laws  other  than  the  Decalogue,  but 
also  that  other  words  are  sometimes  employed  in  place 
of  the  word  "commandments"  in  the  technical  sense. 


FIRST   INVESTIGATION  33 

Debarim,  "words,"  and  herith,  "covenant,"  are  so  used. 
Deut.  IV:10  has  "Especially  the  day  that  thou  stoodest 
before  the  Lord  thy  God  in  Horeb,  when  the  Lord  said 
unto  thee,  gather  my  people  together  and  I  will  make 
them  hear  my  words,  that  they  may  learn  to  fear  me 
all  the  days  that  they  shall  live  upon  the  earth,  and  that 
they  may  teach  their  children."  In  Ex.  XXXIV  :28,  we 
have  "And  he  wrote  upon  the  tables  the  words  of  the 
covenant,  the  Ten  Commandments"  (Heb.  "words"). 
Toroth,  "laws,"  seems,  also,  to  be  used  sometimes  in 
the  place  of  the  technical  term  "commandments"  as 
probably  in  Lev.  XXVI  :46 :  "These  are  the  statutes  and 
the  judgments  and  the  laws  which  the  Lord  made  be- 
tween him  and  the  children  of  Israel  in  Mount  Sinai 
by  the  hand  of  Moses." 

The  sum  of  all  the  investigation  of  this  word  "com- 
mandments" is  this :  That  sometimes  it  is  impossible  to 
tell  certainly  whether  the  word  is  used  in  the  technical 
sense  or  not ;  that  at  times  it  plainly  is  used  in  a  more 
general  sense.  I  have  exhibited  these  peculiarities  at 
length  to  make  the  investigation  complete  and  present 
the  case  as  it  is  and  so  avoid  even  the  appearance  of 
special  pleading  from  a  partial  examination  of  the 
evidence  in  the  case. 

On  the  other  hand,  that  "commandments"  is  fre- 
quently used  in  the  technical  sense  is  quite  clear  and 
unequivocal.  These  instances  of  its  technical  use  deter- 
mine its  technical  character  and  make  it  certainly  one 
of  the  technical  legal  terms,  no  matter  how  often  it  may 
be  used  in  a  non-technical  way.  Such  use  of  a  word, 
now  in  a  technical  sense  and  now  in  a  non-technical 
sense,  is  not  at  all  a  linguistic  rarity  even,  not  to  say 
monstrosity.  Every  modern  dictionary  shows  a  multi- 
tude of  words  which  have  both  a  common  use  and  a 


34  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

technical  use  explicitly  so  designated  in  the  dictionary. 
Such  a  word  as  "staff"  has  not  only  a  common  mean- 
ing, but  no  less  than  six  different  technical  meanings. 
The  discovery  that  this  word  "commandments,"  as  well 
as,  also,  the  other  technical  terms  in  the  Pentateuch 
are  at  times,  or  even  frequently,  used  in  a  non-technical 
sense  presents  no  difficulty,  whatever,  when  the  fact 
that  they  are  so  used  as  technical  terms  is  clearly  estab- 
lished in  each  instance. 

The  foregoing  facts  concerning  the  use  of  these  tech- 
nical terms,  "commandments,"  "judgments,"  and  "stat- 
utes," are  enough  to  establish  their  technical  character 
and  use,  but  still  greater  emphasis  is  given  to  the  tech- 
nical use  of  these  words  when  it  is  noted  that  there 
are  frequently  larger  groups  of  laws,  including  two  or 
more  kinds  of  laws,  to  which  a  comprehensive  title  is 
given  employing  two,  or  sometimes  all  three,  of  these 
technical  terms.  When  this  occurs,  it  is  found  that  all 
the  kinds  of  laws  mentioned  in  such  title  are  found  in 
that  group  and  no  other  kind  of  laws  is  found  there. 
Sometimes,  also,  a  large  group  of  laws  with  a  complex 
title  has  within  it  shorter  lists  of  "judgments"  or  "stat- 
utes" or  "commandments"  each  with  its  own  appro- 
priate title.  The  titles  are  usually  given  in  a  formal 
way,  as  "These  are  the  commandments,"  or  "The  judg- 
ments," or  the  "statutes,"  as  the  case  may  be,  but  some- 
times the  title  is  mentioned  incidentally,  as  "command- 
ments" in  the  Decalogue.  Other  words  are  sometimes 
used  to  describe  these  various  kinds  of  laws,  as  we  have 
seen  in  the  examination  of  the  general  descriptive  legal 
terms  in  the  Pentateuch,  as  well  as  the  technical  terms, 
but  these  technical  terms  are  never  used  for  any  other 
kind  of  laws  than  is  indicated  by  the  technical  meaning 
of  these  various  terms.    The  proof  of  these  three  state- 


FIRST   INVESTIGATION  35 

ments  requires  that  at  this  point  the  whole  list  of 
groups  of  laws  in  the  four  books  of  the  Pentateuch  con- 
taining laws,  together  with  the  associated  narratives 
must  now  be  given,  their  titles  noted,  their  peculiarities 
discussed  in  detail,  and  the  question  of  possible  excep- 
tions to  the  technical  use  of  these  terms  considered. 

4.  Examination  and  classification  of  all  the  laws 
and  associated  narratives  in  the  order  of  the  text. 

The  beginning  of  the  Pentateuchal  laws  is  at  Ex. 
XX  :1.  The  first  list  of  laws  is  the  Decalogue  itself, 
Ex.  XX  :2-17.  The  title  ''commandments,"  is  found  in- 
cidentally in  Ex.  XX  :6 :  "Them  that  love  me  and  keep 
my  commandments."  The  beginning  and  ending  of  the 
list  of  laws  is  distinct  beyond  any  question.  But  what 
rative  of  the  giving  of  the  Decalogue.  The  beginning 
precedes  and  follows  ?  How  much  of  it  belongs  to  this 
list  of  laws,  either  alone  or  in  connection  with  other 
lists  of  laws?  This  is  distinctly  a  literary  question  to 
be  determined  by  the  sense  of  the  text  and  the  context 
of  this  part  of  the  Pentateuch  as  it  stands.  No  matter 
from  what  source  or  sources  the  Biblical  writer  may 
have  drawn  his  materials  or  even  quoted  his  materials 
in  toto,  the  relation  between  the  parts  as  they  stand  is 
to  be  determined  only  by  the  sense  of  the  whole  pas- 
sage of  the  finished  product.  Applying  this  criterion, 
it  is  very  evident  that  the  narrative  in  Ex.  XX:  18-23 
belongs  to  this  first  list  of  laws  and  concludes  the  nar- 
rative of  the  giving  of  the  Decalogue.  The  beginning 
of  that  narrative  is  not  so  easily  determined.  Ex.  XX : 
1,  "God  spake  all  these  words,  saying,"  belongs  to  the 
Decalogue  alone.  Along  with  these  words  the  im- 
mediate introduction  of  the  narrative  of  the  giving  of 
the  Decalogue  begins  with  Ex.  XIX  :1.  Thus  so  much 
of  the  narrative  immediately  preceding  the  Decalogue 


36  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

belongs  only  to  that  list  of  laws.  But  what  is  the  rela- 
tion of  the  eighteenth  chapter  of  Ex.,  concerning  the 
visit  of  Jethro,  and  all  which  goes  before  this  to  the 
Decalogue  and  what  follows  it?  These  portions  can- 
not be  said  to  belong  as  narrative  to  the  Decalogue 
alone.  Yet  they  plainly  all  belong  together  as  narrative. 
While  there  are  many  brief  episodes  recounted,  as  the 
crossing,  the  song  of  Moses  and  the  dancing  of  Miriam 
and  her  maidens,  the  events  of  Marah  and  Elim,  the 
giving  of  quails  and  manna,  the  discouragement  in  the 
wilderness  of  Sin,  the  fighting  with  Amalek,  the  water 
from  the  rock  and,  last  of  all,  the  meeting  with  Moses' 
father-in-law  and  the  better  organization  of  the  civil 
government  of  Israel,  yet  there  is  a  unity  and  progress 
in  the  whole  narrative  which  marks  it  as  one,  as  an 
introduction,  indeed,  not  to  the  Decalogue  alone,  but  to 
all  the  laws  given  in  the  wilderness,  as  it  is  an  introduc- 
tion to  all  the  journeys  in  the  wilderness.  Further 
evidence  of  this,  if  it  were  needed,  will  be  found  by  the 
examination  of  all  the  lists  of  laws  yet  remaining. 

Ex.  XX:24-25.  Immediately  after  the  close  of  the 
Decalogue  narrative,  at  Ex.  XX  :21,  there  is  a  reminder 
of  the  "commandments"  and  then  the  first  brief,  simple 
ritual  regulations,  Ex.  XX  :22-24.  Verses  22-23  re- 
call the  first  and  second  commandments,  those  most 
essential  at  that  moment  to  the  fuller  revelation  of 
Jehovah  as  the  one  true  God,  and  thus  demanding  at 
once  their  undivided  allegiance.  The  ritual  laws  given 
here  have  no  title  but  their  character  examined  in  de- 
tail shows  them  to  be  certainly  "statutes,"  as  follows : 

Ex.  XX:24,  Concerning  altars  of  earth,  kinds  of 
sacrifice  and  the  things  sacrificed. 

Ex.  XX  :25,  Concerning  altars  of  stone. 

Ex.  XX:26,  Concerning  "steps  unto  mine  altar." 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  37 

Ex.  XXI  :1,  XXXIII:  19,  This  long  passage  is  a  list 
of  "judgments"  which  have  already  been  examined 
(p.  14)  and  found  so  typical  as  to  make  perfectly  clear 
the  essential  character  of  the  "judgments."  The  title 
is  set  at  the  head  of  the  list,  Ex.  XXI  :1,  and  constitutes 
the  one  narrative  sentence  preceding  the  list  and  be- 
longing to  it:  "Now  these  are  the  judgments  which 
thou  shalt  set  before  them."  The  title  is  repeated  in 
the  reference  to  the  Decalogue  found  in  Ex.  XXIV  :3; 
"And  Moses  came  and  told  the  people  all  the  words  of 
the  Lord  and  all  the  judgments."  The  narrative  por- 
tion, Ex.  XXIII  :20-XXIV:  18,  closes  the  account  of  the 
giving  of  these  "judgments"  with  general  directions 
for  the  journey  to  the  promised  land  and  the  occupa- 
tion of  it,  events  at  that  time  in  immediate  contempla- 
tion, together  with  an  account  of  the  reading  to  the 
people  of  the  laws  already  given  and  the  making  of 
the  Covenant,  and,  also,  an  account  of  the  theophany 
before  the  seventy  elders. 

In  the  midst  of  this  section  is  a  short  list  of  com- 
mandments of  a  general  character,  Ex.  XXIII  :31-33. 
There  is  no  title  to  this  list,  but  they  are :  Ex.  XXIII : 
31 ;  A  command  to  drive  out  the  inhabitants  of  Canaan ; 
Ex.  XXIII  :32-33,  Forbidding  alliances  with  inhabitants 
of  Canaan.  These  commandments  are,  in  each  case,  con- 
cerning matters  "one  with  another,"  and  so  of  the  na- 
ture of  "judgments."  They  were  not  however  "judg- 
ings,"  but  new  commandments  of  God.  They  were 
special  directions  given  in  matters  "one  with  another," 
and  so  belong  to  a  class  of  laws  of  which  we  will  find  a 
few  specimens  with  titles  and  which  are  called  most 
aptly,  as  we  shall  see,  "statutes  of  judgment." 

Ex.  XXIV:1-XXVII:19.  The  narrative  of  the  first 
period  of  the  giving  of  laws  at  Sinai  closes  with  the 


38  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

end  of  chapter  XXIII.  At  chapter  XXIV  begins  the 
account  of  the  second  period  of  the  giving  of  laws  and 
directions  at  Sinai,  at  least  forty  days  later  than  the 
first  period.  The  laws  consist  of  several  lists  with  ac- 
companying narrative.  Chapter  XXIV  is  entirely  a 
narrative  introducing  the  lists  of  directions  that  fol- 
low. 

The  first  list  here,  Ex.  XXIV:1-XXVII:19,  is  with- 
out distinctive  title  but  the  character  of  the  laws,  as 
directions  for  procedure,  and  the  exact  similarity  to 
those  lists  immediately  following  which  have  titles, 
show  these  laws  to  be  "statutes."  This  is  confirmed, 
also,  by  the  explicit  direction,  "According  to  all  that  I 
show  thee,"  Ex.  XXIV  :9,  i.e.,  follow  "directions,"  for 
which  the  Hebrew  word  is  khuqqim. 

The  "statutes"  of  this  list,  beginning  with  the  usual 
narrative  formula,  Ex.  XXIV :1,  are: 

Ex.  XXV:2-9,  Directions  for  the  offerings  for  the 

Tabernacle. 
Ex.  XXV:10-22,  Directions  for  the  construction  and 

use  of  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant. 
Ex.  XXV:23-30,  Directions  for  the  Table  of  Shew 

bread  and  its  dishes. 
Ex.  XXV:31-40,  Directions  for  the  candlestick  and 

the  snuffers. 
Ex.  XXVI:  1-14,  Directions  for  the  curtains  of  the 

Tabernacle. 
Ex.  XXVI :  15-30,  Directions  for  the  boards  and  bars 

of  the  Tabernacle. 
Ex.  XXVI:31-32,  Directions  for  the  vail. 
Ex.  XXVI:33-37,    Directions    for    setting    up    the 

Tabernacle  and  its  furniture. 
Ex.  XXVII:  1-8,  Directions  for  the  great  Altar  of 
Burnt  Offering  and  its  utensils. 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  39 

Ex.  XXVII  :9-18,   Directions  for  the  Court  of  the 

Tabernacle. 
Ex.  XXVII:  19,  Directions  concerning  material  of 

the  vessels  of  the  Tabernacle  service. 
Ex.  XXVII  :20-21,  Here  a  brief  but  distinct  direc- 
tion is  given  concerning  "the  oil  for  the  light, 
to  cause  the  lamp  to  burn  always."    This  law  is 
called  a  ''statute  forever."     Ex.  XXVII  :21. 
Ex.  XXVIII  :l-43,  Directions  concerning  the  priest- 
hood, with  title  at  Ex.  XXVIII  :43;  "A  statute 
forever." 
The  passage  in  detail  is  as  follows : 
Ex.  XXVIII  :1,  Directions  for  the  setting  aside  of 

the  family  of  Aaron  to  the  priesthood. 
Ex.  XXVIII  :2-5,    Directions   for   the   priests   gar- 
ments. 
Ex.  XXVIII  :6-13,  Directions  for  the  Ephod. 
Ex.  XXVIII:  14-30,   Directions  for  the  priesthood. 
Ex.  XXVIII  :31-35,  Directions  for  the  robe  of  the 

Ephod. 
Ex.  XXVIII  :36-38,  Directions  for  the  horns  over- 
laid with  gold. 
Ex.  XXVIII  :39,  Directions  for  the  coat  and  girdle. 
Ex.  XXVIII  :40-43,   Directions   for  the   investiture 

and  consecration  of  the  priests. 
Ex.  XXIX:  1-46,  Detailed  directions  for  the  conse- 
cration and  investiture  of  the  priests  and  for 
the  daily  offerings.     These  directions  are  re- 
ferred to  as  a  "statute"  in  verse  9,  and  also  in 
verse  28.     The  directions  in  detail  are  as  fol- 
lows: 
Ex.  XXIX:  1-9,  Directions  for  the  approach  with 
sacrifice  and  for  the  investiture  of  the  priests. 
Ex.  XXIX:10-14,  Directions  for  the  sin  offering. 


40  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

Ex.  XXIX:  15-18,  Directions  for  a  burnt  offering  of 
a  ram. 

Ex.  XXIX:  19-28,  Directions  for  the  Heave  Offering 
of  a  ram. 

Ex.  XXIX:29-30,  Directions  for  the  inheritance  of 
the  holy  garments  of  Aaron. 

Ex.  XXIX:31-37,  Directions  for  the  sacred  meal 
for  the  priests  and  for  the  continuance  of  the 
sacrifice  for  seven  days. 

Ex.  XXIX :  38-46,  Directions  concerning  the  morn- 
ing and  evening  sacrifices. 

Ex.  XXX:  1-38.  This  passage  contains  a  number 
of  directions  concerning  various  ceremonies  and 
requirements  in  connection  with  the  religion  of 
Israel.  In  only  one  of  these  laws,  Ex.  XXX  :21, 
is  the  word  "statute"  used,  but  they  are  clearly 
all  similar  laws  of  religious  procedure. 

Ex.  XXX:  1-10,  Directions  concerning  the  altar  of 
incense  and  the  service  there. 

Ex.  XXX:11-16,  Directions  concerning  the  half 
shekel  redemption  money.  These  might  at  first 
sight  appear  to  be  a  tax  law  of  the  state,  and  so 
a  "judgment,"  being  a  matter  "one  with  an- 
other," when  one  party  was  the  state.  But,  in 
fact,  it  is  not  so.  It  was  a  religious  service  and 
no  more  a  tax  law  of  the  state  than  similar  con- 
tribution toward  religion  now.  It  was  not  ad- 
ministered by  the  courts ;  it  was  a  religious  duty 
attended  to  at  the  sanctuary.  Thus  it  was  a  law 
of  religious  procedure,  a  "statute." 

Ex.  XXX:17-22,  Directions  for  the  laver  and  for 
the  ablutions  of  the  priests,  distinctly  called  a 
"statute,"  verse  21. 

Ex.  XXX  :22-33,  Directions  concerning  the  holy  oil 
of  annointing,  and  the  use  of  it. 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  41 

Ex.  XXX:34-38,  Directions  concerning  perfume. 

Ex.  XXXI:1-XXXIV:17.  This  narrative  portion 
which  now  follows  clearly  belongs  to  the  "stat- 
utes" of  the  Tabernacle  and  its  service  which 
have  just  been  examined. 

Ex.  XXXI  :1-11,  Contains  the  account  of  the  appoint- 
ing of  Bezaliel  and  his  fellows  to  direct  the  con- 
struction of  the  Tabernacle  and  its  furniture, 
and  the  garments,  the  oil  and  the  incense. 

Ex.  XXXI:  12-18,  Gives  instruction  to  Moses  to 
charge  the  people  concerning  the  keeping  of  the 
Sabbath. 

Ex.  XXXII  :l-35,Recounts  the  whole  episode  of  the 
golden  calf. 

Ex.  XXXIII:  1-23,  Relates  the  withdrawal  of  the 
full  fellowship  which  Israel  had  previously  en- 
joyed, the  Tent  of  Meeting  being  taken  out  of 
the  camp,  together  with  the  account  of  the  ef- 
fective intercession  of  Moses  for  the  favor  of 
God  toward  the  people. 

Ex.  XXXIV:  1-17,  Recounts  the  renewal  of  the 
tables  of  stone  for  the  Decalogue,  and  the  ful- 
fillment of  God's  promise  to  make  a  fuller 
revelation  of  himself  to  Moses,  together  with  an 
exhortation  concerning  the  keeping  of  the 
various  commands. 

Ex.  XXXIV:  18-26,  Presentation  of  a  short  mixed 
list  of  laws  without  any  title.  Their  character 
is  not  open  to  question.  Verse  21  is  a  reminder 
of  the  fourth  commandment :  all  the  rest  of  this 
list  are  "statutes."  Besides  they  are  all  in  fact 
but  a  narrative  concerning  laws  already  given. 
The  list  in  detail  is  as  follows : 

Ex.  XXXIV:  18,  A  "statute"  of  the  Feast  of  Un- 
leavened bread. 


42  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

Ex.  XXXIV:  19-20,  A  "statute"  of  the  redemption  of 
the  first  born. 

Ex.  XXXIV  :21,  A  "judgment"  concerning  Sabbath 
keeping,  enforcement  of  the  fourth  command- 
ment, a  law  between  the  individual  and  the 
state  to  be  enforced  by  the  courts. 

Ex.  XXXIV  :22,  A  "statute"  of  the  Feast  of  Weeks 
and  of  the  Feast  of  Ingathering. 

Ex.  XXXIV  :23-24,  A  "statute"  concerning  the  ap- 
pearance of  all  males  before  the  Lord  three  times 
in  a  year. 

Ex.  XXXIV  :25-26,  A  "statute"  concerning  leaving 
any  portion  of  the  Feast  of  the  Passover  until 
the  morning,  concerning  the  first  fruits  of  the 
land,  and  concerning  the  seething  of  a  kid  in 
the  mother's  milk,  probably  a  "judgment." 

Ex.  XXXIV  :27-35,  A  narrative  of  the  second  stay 
of  Moses  for  forty  days  on  the  mountain,  and  of 
his  return  to  speak  with  the  people. 

Ex.  XXXV:  1-35,  A  narrative  of  the  announcement 
of  "judgments"  for  the  enforcement  of  the 
fourth  commandment,  and  the  call  to  the  people 
for  gifts  for  the  Tabernacle,  the  announcement 
of  the  appointment  of  Bezaliel  and  his  fellows 
for  the  work  of  constructing  the  Tabernacle  and 
its  furniture. 

Ex.  XXXVI  :1-XL:38,  Gives  account  of  the  work  of 
construction  by  Bezaliel  and  his  fellows. 

Ex.  XXXVI  :l-38,  The  gathering  of  material  and  the 
construction  of  the  Tabernacle. 

Ex.  XXXVII:  1-29,  The  preparation  of  the  Ark,  the 
table  of  the  Shew  bread,  the  candlestick  and  the 
altar  of  incense,  and  the  holy  annointing  oil. 

Ex.  XXXVIII  :1-31,   Recounts  the   making  of  the 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  43 

altar  of  Burnt  Offering,  and  the  Court  of  the 
Tabernacle  and  gives  the  "sum  of  the  Taber- 
nacle." 
Ex.  XXXIX  :1-31,  Gives  account  of  the  making  of 
the   holy   garments,   the    ephod,    the    precious 
stones  of  the  ephod,  and  the  robe  of  the  ephod, 
the  coats  of  fine  linen,  and  the  plate  of  pure 
gold  for  the  frontlet. 
Ex.  XXXIX  :32-43,  Tells  of  the  completion  of  the 
whole  work  and  the  turning  over  of  the  com- 
pleted Tabernacle  and  furniture  to  Moses,  and 
its  acceptance  by  him. 
Ex.  XL:1-16,  Recounts  directions  for  the  setting  up 
of  the  Tabernacle  and  the  investiture  of  the 
priests. 
Ex.  XL:17-33,  Tells  of  the  obedience  to  these  direc- 
tions in  the  setting  up  of  the  Tabernacle  and  the 
institution  of  its  service. 
Ex.  XL:34-38,  Tells  of  the  giving  of  the  cloud  of 
glory  to  the  Tabernacle  and  of  the  method  of 
its  conduct  of  the  march. 
Thus  all  the  remaining  chapters  of  Exodus  from  the 
giving  of  directions  for  the  construction  of  the  Taber- 
nacle, Ex.  XXX  :38,  to  the  close  of  the  book,  almost  en- 
tirely narrative  in  character,  are  immediately  connected 
with  the  giving  of  the  instructions,  the  "statutes"  for 
the  Tabernacle  and  its  service  at  Sinai,  and  so  belong, 
as  literature,  to  those  "statutes." 

LEVITICUS 

Lev.  I-XVI,  Short  lists  of  "statutes,"  some  of  them 
without  title,  but  all  of  the  same  statutory  char- 
acter, as  follows: 

Lev.  1:1-17,  The  law  of  the  Burnt  Offering. 


44  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

Lev.  11:1-3,  The  law  of  the  Meat  Offering. 

Lev.  11:4-16,  The  law  of  Oblations. 

Lev.  111:1-17,  Oblation  of  the  sacrifice  of  a  Peace 
Offering. 

Lev.  IV:  1-12,  Law  of  Sin  Offering  of  ignorance,  of 
the  individual. 

Lev.  IV:13-21,  Law  of  Sin  Offering,  of  the  whole 
congregation. 

Lev.  IV:22-26,  Law  of  Sin  Offering,  of  the  ruler. 

Lev.  IV:27-35,  Law  of  Sin  Offering,  of  the  com- 
mon people. 

Lev.  V:l-19,  Law  of  the  Trespass  Offering,  for 
concealing  guilty  Knowledge,  for  touching  an 
unclean  thing,  in  making  oath,  in  sacrilege,  and 
in  sins  of  ignorance. 

Lev.  VI  :1-13,  Law  of  the  Trespass  and  Burnt  Offer- 
ings. 

Lev.  VI:  14-23,  Law  of  the  Meat  Offering. 

Lev.  VI  :24-30,  Law  of  the  Sin  Offering. 

Lev.  VII:  1-27,  Law  of  Trespass  Offering. 

Lev.  VII  :28-34,  Law  of  the  Peace  Offering. 

Lev.  VII  :35-36,  Law  of  the  portion  of  the  priests. 

Lev.  VII:37-38,  A  Summary. 

Lev.  VIII:  1-30,  Narrative  of  the  consecration  of 
Aaron  and  his  sons,  leading  directly  to. 

Lev.  VIII:31-36,  A  statute  concerning  the  time  of 
consecration,  without  title. 

Lev.  IX:  1-24,  Narrative  of  the  first  offering  by 
Aaron  and  his  sons,  rehearsing  much  of  the 
statutes  of  offerings. 

Lev.  X  :l-7.  Narrative  of  the  sacrilege  of  Nadab  and 
Abihu  and  the  consequences. 

Lev.  X:8-ll,  Prohibition  of  wine  and  strong  drink 
for  the  priests  at  the  time  of  the  Tabernacle 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  45 

service;  title  X:9.     (Did  this  statute  grow  out 
of  the  preceding  sacrilege?) 

Lev.  X:  12-15,  The  "due"  of  the  priests,  a  "statute 
forever."    Title,  X:15. 

Lev.  X  :  16-20,  Narrative  of  the  goat  of  the  sin  offer- 
ing that  was  not  eaten. 

Lev.  XI:  1-47,  Statute  of  meats  clean  and  unclean; 
without  title. 

Lev.  XII:  1-8,  Statute  of  purification  after  child- 
birth; for  title  it  has  the  general  term  torah, 
V.  7. 

Lev.  XIII:  1-59,  Directions  for  the  detection  of 
leprosy;  Torah,  v.  59. 

Lev.  XIV:  1-57,  Cleansing  for  leprosy;  torah,  v.  2. 

Lev.  XV:  1-33,  Uncleanness  of  issues;  toy^ah,  v.  32. 

Lev.  XVI  :l-28,  Law  of  the  scape  goat;  without  title. 

Lev.  XVI  :29-34,  Law  of  the  Feast  of  Expiation ;  a 
"statute,"  title,  vs.  29,  31,  34. 

Lev.  XVII:1-XXVI:45.  This  long  passage  is  the 
so-called  "Holiness  Code."  It  consists  of  both 
"judgments"  and  "statutes,"  and  so  there  is 
frequently  the  double  title,  "statutes  and  judg- 
ments." The  groups  of  laws  and  intervening 
narrative  in  detail  are  as  follows : 

Lev.  XVII  :l-9,  A  "statute"  concerning  the  bring- 
ing of  the  offering  to  the  door  of  the  Taber- 
nacle ;  title,  XVII  :7. 

Lev.  XVII:10-16,  A  "statute"  concerning  the  eating 
of  flesh  with  the  blood ;  without  title. 

Lev.  XVIII:  1-30,  Laws  of  unlawful  marriage  and 
all  such  abominations.     There  is  first, 

Lev.  XVIII:  1-5,  A  brief  narrative  giving  also  the 
title  for  laws  following,  "judgments"  and  "stat- 
utes" XVIII  :4-5. 


46  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

Lev.  XVIII  :6-17,  Laws  of  consanguinity  in  mar- 
riage, concerning  one's  mother,  his  step-mother, 
his  half-sister,  his  niece,  his  aunt,  his  daughter- 
in-law,  his  sister-in-law,  his  step-daughter  and 
his  granddaughter.  These  laws,  with  one  of  un- 
cleanness,  XVIII:  19,  are  clearly  for  the  most 
part  "statutes."  Though  we  recognize  them  as 
involving  questions  of  moral  quality,  most  of 
them  are  not  to  be  recognized  as  mala  in  se,  but 
as  mala  prohibita.  Some  of  them  are  still  among 
us  only  ecclesiastical  regulations  and  the  sub- 
ject of  great  dispute  concerning  their  moral  or 
immoral  character  among  Christians. 

On  the  other  hand,  verse  18,  bigamy;  20 
adultery,  21  the  law  against  human  sacrifice, 
especially  child  sacrifice,  22  sodomy,  23  bestial- 
ity, are  all  as  clearly  ''judgments"  mala  in  se, 
to  be  administered  by  the  courts.  In  keeping 
with  the  mixed  character  of  this  list  of  laws, 
the  title,  already  found  at  XVIII  :4-5,  is  re- 
peated in  XVIII  :26.  The  chapter  closes  with  a 
narrative  concerning  the  full  effects  of  such 
abominations  upon  the  people.     XVIII  :27-30. 

Lev.  XIX:  1-4.  After  two  verses  of  narrative  intro- 
duction there  is  a  brief  form  of  three  of  the 
Commandments,  the  fifth,  the  fourth  and  the 
second.  There  is  no  title,  but  these  laws  are 
clearly  of  the  nature  of  "judgments"  enforcing 
the  fundamental  law,  exactly  as  the  enactments 
of  Congress  enforce  various  portions  of  the 
fundamental  law  in  the  constitution  of  the 
United  States. 

Lev.  XIX  :5-37,  Another  list  of  mixed  laws,  in  de- 
tail as  follows : 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  47 

Lev.  XIX: 5-8,  Law  of  the  peace  offering;  a  "stat- 
ute." 

Lev.  XIX:9-10,  Law  of  gleaning;  a  "statute." 

Lev.  XIX :11,  Laws  against  stealing  and  lying; 
"judgments." 

Lev.  XIX:  12,  Law  against  false  swearing  and  pro- 
fanity, enforcement  of  the  third  commandment ; 
"judgments." 

Lev.  XIX:  13,  Law  against  fraud  and  oppression; 
"judgments." 

Lev.  XIX:  14,  Law  against  cruelty  to  the  weak; 
"judgment." 

Lev.  XIX  :15,  Law  against  respect  of  persons  in 
judgment;  "judgment." 

Lev.  XIX  :16,  Law  against  tale-bearing  and  slander; 
"judgment." 

Lev.  XIX :17,  Law  against  malice;  "judgment." 

Lev.  XIX:  18,  Law  against  private  revenge  for 
wrongs,  i.e.,  so  called  "mob-law";  "judgment." 

Lev.  XIX  :19,  Law  against  mingled  breeds,  seeds 
and  materials  for  weaving;  "statutes."  The 
title  "statutes,"  is  set  here  at  the  head  of  a  series 
of  statutes  continuing  to  Lev.  XIX  :28,  after 
the  long  list  of  "judgments"  just  preceding. 

Lev.  XIX  :20-22,  Law  of  trespass-offering  for  forni- 
cation with  a  slave- woman ;  "statute." 

Lev.  XIX:23-25,  Law  of  uncircumcised  fruit;  "stat- 
ute." 

Lev.  XIX  :26-28,  Laws  against  eating  flesh  with  the 
blood,  using  enchantment  and  observing  times, 
rounding  the  corners  of  the  head  or  marring 
the  corners  of  the  beard,  cuttings  in  the  flesh 
or  marks  upon  the  body ;  "statutes." 

Lev.  XIX  :29,  Law  against  pandering  in  the  case  of 
a  daughter;  "judgment." 


48  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

Lev.  XIX  :30,  Laws  of  Sabbath-keeping  and  rever- 
ence; "judgments." 

Lev.  XIX  :31,  Law  against  dealing  with  those  who 
have  familiar  spirits  or  who  are  wizards ;  "judg- 
ment." 

Lev.  XIX  :32,  Law  of  reverence  for  persons,  a  "judg- 
ment," enforcing  the  fifth  commandment. 

Lev.  XIX:33-34,  Law  against  oppressing  aliens,  a 
"judgment." 

Lev.  XIX:35-36,  Law  of  weights  and  measures;  a 
"judgment."  This  series  of  laws  of  various 
kinds  in  Lev.  XIX:  1-37,  is  now  brought  to  a 
close  with  the  double  title,  "statutes  and  judg- 
ments,"    Lev.  XIX  :37. 

Lev.  XX:  1-27,  Presents  another  list  of  laws  with 
the  usual  introductory  formula,  "And  the  Lord 
spake  unto  Moses."     In  detail  it  is  as  follows: 

Lev.  XX:2-5,  Law  against  child-sacrifice;  "judg- 
ment." 

Lev.  XX:  6,  Law  against  turning  after  those  having 
familiar  spirits,  and  after  wizards;  "judg- 
ments." 

Lev.  XX  :7-8,  Presents  an  exhortation  to  holiness  in 
character  which  was  by  the  keeping  of  the 
moral  laws  of  which  the  "judgments"  were  the 
enactments  for  the  people,  with  also  the  addi- 
tional exhortation  to  "keep  my  statutes."  Thus 
the  whole  exhortation  is  a  circumlocution  for 
the  formula  "judgments  and  statutes." 

Lev.  XX  :9,  Law  against  cursing  father  and  mother; 
a  "judgment." 

Lev.  XX:10-12,  Law  against  adultery;  a  "judg- 
ment." 

Lev.  XX:13,  Law  against  sodomy;  a  "judgment," 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  49 

Lev.  XX:14,  Law  against  incest;  a  "judgment." 

Lev.  XX:15-16,  Law  against  beastiality;  a  "judg- 
ment." 

Lev.  XX:17-21,  Laws  of  consanguinity;  "statutes." 
In  verse  22  the  exhortation  is  given  to  "keep 
all  my  statutes  and  all  my  judgments,  and  do 
them  that  the  land,  whither  I  bring  you  to  dwell 
therein,  spue  you  not  out."  This  double  title 
occurring  here  seems  to  look  both  backward  and 
forward,  forward  to  the  "judgments"  and  "stat- 
utes" found  in  the  list  to  the  end. 

Lev.  XX  : 23-26,  Law  against  conformity  to  the  ways 
of  the  people  of  the  land,  and  against  unclean- 
ness ;  "statutes." 

Lev.  XX  :27,  Law  against  those  who  have  familiar 
spirits,  and  against  wizards;  "judgments." 

Lev.  XXI:  1-24,  A  number  of  laws  without  title,  as 
follows : 

Lev.  XXI  :1-15,  Laws  against  defilement ;  "statutes." 
Even  verse  9  is  not  a  "judgment,"  but  a  "stat- 
ute" against  defilement  of  a  priest.  It  might 
be  called  a  "statute  of  judgment." 

Lev.  XXI:  16-24,  Law  of  blemishes  among  priests; 
a  "statute." 

Lev.  XXII:  1-9,  Uncleanness  in  priests;  a  "statute." 

Lev.  XXII :  10-13,  Doing  of  holy  things  by  strangers ; 
a  "statute." 

Lev.  XXII:  14-16,  Doing  holy  things  unwittingly;  a 
"statute." 

Lev.  XXII:  17-25,  Free-will  offering  and  oblation  of 
a  stranger;  a  "statute." 

Lev.  XXII:26-28,  Age  of  animals  for  sacrifice;  a 
"statute." 

Lev.  XXII  :29,  Offering  of  one's  own  will;  a  "stat- 
ute." 


so  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

Lev.  XXII :30,  Offerings  to  be  eaten  the  same  day; 
a  "statute." 

Lev.  XXII  :31-33,  A  few  words  of  general  exhorta- 
tion following  the  preceding  list  of  laws. 

Lev.  XXIII:  1-44,  A  list  of  "statutes,"  some  with 
titles  and  some  without;  most  of  them  ritual 
laws  concerning  the  feasts.  In  detail  they  are 
as  follows : 

Lev.  XXIII:  1-2,  Brief  introductory  narrative. 

Lev.  XXIII :3,  The  Sabbath  as  a  holy  convocation; 
a  "statute,"  not  a  "judgment"  of  a  civil  holiday 
in  this  case. 

Lev.  XXIII :4-8,  The  Feast  of  the  Passover;  a 
"statute." 

Lev.  XXIII :9-14,  Feast  of  the  First  Fruits;  a  "stat- 
ute," title.  Lev.  XXIII  :14. 

Lev.  XXIII :15-21,  The  Feast  of  Pentecost;  a  "stat- 
ute," title,  XXIII  :21. 

Lev.  XXIII  :22,  Gleanings  for  the  poor  and  for 
strangers. 

Lev.  XXIII  :23-25,  The  Feast  of  Trumpets. 

Lev.  XXIII  :26-32,  The  Day  of  Atonement. 

Lev.  XXIII  :33-36,  The  Feast  of  Tabernacles. 

Lev.  XXIII  :37-38,  Two  verses  of  narrative  concern- 
ing the  feasts  and  Sabbaths. 

Lev.  XXIII  :39-44,  The  Feast  of  Tabernacles  in  de- 
tail; a  "statute,"  title,  XXIII  :41. 

Lev.  XXIV:  1-4,  Law  of  requisition  of  oil  for  the 
lamps,  a  "statute" ;  title.  Lev.  XXIV  :3. 

Lev.  XXIV  :5-9,  The  Shew  Bread  and  its  presenta- 
tion; a  "statute";  title,  XXIV :9. 

Lev.  XXIV:  10-23.  This  passage  is  one  of  the  clear- 
est illustrations  of  the  use  and  the  probable 
source  of  most  of  the  lists  of  laws  after  the  fiist 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  51 

formal  giving  of  laws.  There  is  an  incident 
which  called  forth  a  specific  law,  and  together 
with  this  law  other  laws  were  added,  usually  in 
part,  at  least,  of  a  similar  kind.  There  is  nar- 
rated the  story  of  the  Egyptian  lad  who  cursed 
God,  was  arrested,  tried  and  condemned  to  death 
by  stoning  and  the  sentence  carried  out.  Verse 
16  records  the  "judgment"  for  such  a  case,  and 
following  this,  is  a  list  of  "judgments."  There 
is  no  title  expressed,  though  the  character  of 
the  laws  is  perfectly  clear. 

Lev.  XXIV:  10-16,  Narrates  this  incident  together 
with  the  "judgment"  against  such  a  crime. 

Lev.  XXIV :17,  Law  against  homicide;  a  "judg- 
ment." i 

Lev.  XXIV :18,  Killing  of  any  man's  beast;  a  "judg- 
ment." 

Lev.  XXIV:  19-21,  Bodily  injury,  and  reprisals,  lex 
taliones;  a  "judgment." 

Lev.  XXIV :22,  Impartiality  of  judgment;  a  "judg- 
ment." These  laws,  from  XXIV:  10,  are  all 
"judgments,"  though  no  technical  title  is  given 
in  the  list.  The  expression  "judgment  of  law" 
does  occur,  verse  22,  but  mishpat  is  here  used  in 
an  idiomatic  way  equivalent  to  "manner,"  as  in 
many  other  places. 

Lev.  XXV:  1-55,  Now  just  at  the  end  of  the  sojourn 
at  Sinai,  when  it  was  expected  that  Israel  would 
proceed  at  once  to  the  promised  land,  the  laws 
of  the  Sabbatic  year  and  the  Year  of  Jubilee 
were  given,  as  they  would  be  needed  there.  The 
title,  "statutes  and  judgments"  is  in  Lev.  XXV : 
18.  These  were  special  regulations  concerning 
"matters  one  with  another,"  the  "other"  being 


52  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

the  state.  But  they  were  not  only  "judgments," 
mala  in  se,  but  also  special  regulations,  mala 
prohibita.  Hence  appropriately  called  "statutes 
and  judgments."  With  these  laws  are  some 
others  which  will  be  found  of  the  same  char- 
acter.   In  detail  they  are  as  follows : 

Lev.  XXV:  1-34,  The  year  of  Jubilee. 

Lev.  XXV:35-38,  Relief  of  the  poor  by  loans. 

Lev.  XXV:39-46,  Treatment  of  those  who  become 
servants  through  poverty. 

Lev.  XXV:47-55,  Redemption  of  one  who  becomes 
bond-servant  of  a  stranger  and  sojourner. 
Nothing  could  bring  out  more  clearly  the  tech- 
nical character  of  these  terms  "judgment"  and 
"statute"  than  such  discriminate  use  of  these 
terms  in  laws  like  those  in  this  list. 

Lev.  XXVI:  1-46,  Presents  a  summary  of  all  the 
laws  preceding.  There  are  "judgments"  based 
upon  the  Commandments,  and  "statutes"  con- 
cerning all  God's  dealing  with  them  as  a  people. 
And  so  two  comprehensive  titles  are  found: 
Lev.  XXVI  :3,  lying  between  the  "judgments" 
based  upon  certain  "commandments"  preceding, 
and  the  "statutes"  following:  Lev.  XXVI :15 
is  a  comprehensive  title  referring  to  all  kinds 
of  laws  including  "commandments,"  "statutes," 
and  "judgments";  and  Lev.  XXVI :46,  where 
the  title  is  three-fold,  but  "laws"  is  used  instead 
of  "commandments,"  thus,  "statutes,  judgments 
and  laws."  The  title  seems  also  to  be  a  sum- 
ming up  of  all  the  laws  from  XVII  :1  to  XXVI: 
45.    In  detail,  this  chapter  XXVI  is  as  follows : 

Lev.  XXVI  :l-2,  "Judgments"  based  upon  command- 
ments, worship  by  images.  Sabbaths,  and  rever- 
ence for  the  sanctuary. 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  53 

Lev.  XXVI  :3-13,  Blessings  promised,  of  the  nature 

of  "statutes." 
Lev.  XXVI:  14-45,   Curses  threatened;  also   of  the 

nature  of  "statutes." 
Lev.  XXVII  :1-13,  Estimation  for  vows;  "statutes." 
Lev.  XXVII:  14-25,  Redemption  of  sanctified  things, 

house  and  field. 
Lev.  XXVII  :26,  Concerning  devoted  things,  tithes 
and  the  redemption  of  tithes. 

NUMBERS 

Num.  I-X.  These  chapters  recount  the  numbering: 
of  the  people  and  the  directions  given  prepara- 
tory to  the  resumption  of  the  journey  toward 
the  promised  land.  The  only  technical  title  of 
any  kind  which  occurs  within  this  passage  is 
the  "statute"  of  the  Passover  in  Num.  IX :  12-14, 
and  the  blowing  of  trumpets,  a  "statute  for- 
ever," in  Num.  X  :8.  But  the  directions  given 
are  of  the  nature  of  "statutes,"  as  will  appear 
upon  examination,  and  there  are  some  nar- 
rative portions  scattered  throughout.  Though 
these  directions  are  of  the  nature  of  "statutes," 
this  technical  title  is  seldom,  if  ever,  applied  to 
a  direction  which  is  to  be  carried  out  but  once. 
It  was  applied  rather  to  something  which  was 
to  be  repeated  continually.  The  chapter  in  de- 
tail is  as  follows : 

Num.  1:1-46,  The  Command  to  number  Israel  with 
accompanying  narrative. 

Num.  1 : 47-54,  The  tribe  of  Levi  not  to  be  numbered, 
and  directions  concerning  the  Tabernacle  on  the 
march. 

Num.  11:1-31,  The  order  of  the  camp  about  the 
Tabernacle. 


54  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

Num.  II  :32-34,  Brief  narrative  at  the  close  of  the 
directions  for  the  numbering  and  the  order  of 
the  camp. 

Num.  Ill  :l-4,  Narrative  of  the  generations  of  Aaron 
and  Moses. 

Num.  111:5-13,  Duties  of  the  tribe  of  Levi. 

Num.  111:14-39,  Special  numbering  of  the  tribe  of 
Levi,  and  their  order  about  the  Tabernacle. 

Num.  in  :40-43,  Numbering  of  the  first-born  males 
from  a  month  old. 

Num.  111:44-51,  The  Levites  instead  of  the  first- 
born among  Israel,  together  with  the  redemp- 
tion money  for  the  excess  of  Israelites. 

Num.  IV:1-15,  Numbering  of  the  sons  of  Kohath 
with  the  enumeration  of  their  duties. 

Num.  IV:  16,  The  office  of  Eleazar. 

Num.  IV:  17-20,  The  tribe  of  Kohath  not  to  be  cut 
off. 

Num.  IV:21-28,  The  numbering,  and  the  duties,  of 
the  sons  of  Gershom. 

Num.  IV:29-33,  The  numbering,  and  the  duties,  of 
the  sons  of  Merari. 

Num.  IV : 34-49,  A  narrative  portion  recounting  the 
numbering  of  the  Kohathites,  the  Gershomites 
and  the  Merarites,  and  the  Levites  according 
to  the  direction  given. 

Num.  V:l-4,  Expulsion  of  lepers. 

Num.  V:  5-10,  Recompense  of  trespass. 

Num.  V:ll-31,  Trial  of  jealousy. 

Num.  VI:  1-22,  The  Nazarite. 

Num.  VI:23-27,  Form  of  blessing. 

Num.  VII:  1-89,  Account  of  the  dedication  of  the 
altar  and  the  offerings  of  the  princes. 

Num.  VIII:  1-4,  Narrative  of  the  lighting  of  the 
lamps  in  the  candlestick. 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  55 

Num.  VIII  :5-19,  Directions  for  the  cleansing  of  the 
Levites. 

Num.  VIII  :20-22,  Narrative  of  the  cleansing  of  the 
Levites. 

Num.  VIII:23-26,  Duties  of  the  Levites. 

Num.  IX:  1-3,  The  command  to  keep  the  Passover 
again ;  both  a  "statute"  and  a  "judgment."  The 
Passover  was  both  a  civil  and  a  religious  ordi- 
nance, it  was  a  religious  service,  but  enforced 
by  law. 

Num.  IX  :4-5,  Narrative  of  the  keeping  of  the  Pass- 
over. 

Num.  IX  :6-14,  Narrative  of  the  case  of  the  defiled 
man  and  the  Passover,  with  laws  of  the  Pass- 
over for  special  cases;  a  "statute." 

Num.  IX:15-23,  Narrative  of  the  erection  of  the 
Tabernacle,  and  the  daily  journeys  at  the  com- 
mand of  the  Lord. 

Num.  X:l-10,  Blowing  of  the  silver  trumpets;  a 
"statute,"  Num.  X:8. 

Num.  X:  11-28,  Narrative  of  the  setting  forward  on 
the  journey  to  Canaan. 

Num.  X:29-32,  Narrative  of  the  request  to  Hobab 
to  accompany  Israel,  and  of  his  refusal. 

Num.  X:33-36,  Summarizing  narrative  of  the  de- 
parture and  the  journey. 

Num.  XI:  1-9,  Narrative  of  the  complaint  of  the 
people  about  food  and  of  their  lust  for  flesh. 

Num.  XI:  10-17,  Narrative  of  the  complaint  of 
Moses  and  of  his  inability  to  bear  the  burden, 
and  of  the  appointment  of  the  seventy  elders. 

Num.  XI:  18-23,  Narrative  of  the  promise  of  quails. 

Num.  XI:24-30,  Narrative  of  the  selection  of  the 
seventy  elders. 


56  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

Num.  XI  :31-35,  Narrative  of  the  giving  of  the  quails 

and  of  the  plague  that  resulted. 
Num.  XII:1-16,    Narrative    of    the    complaint    of 

Miriam  and  Aaron  about  the  Ethiopian  woman, 

with  an  account  of  the  leprosy  of  Miriam,  and 

of  her  punishment. 
Num.  XIII:  1-33,  The  sending  of  the  spies  and  their 

report. 
Num.  XIV:  1-39,  Narrative  of  the  rebellion  of  the 

people  and  their  punishment. 
Num.  XIV:40-45,  The  narrative  of  the  attempt  of 

the  people  to  go  up  against  the  command  of  God, 

and  of  their  defeat. 
Num.  XV:1-16,  Law  of  meat  offerings  and  drink 

offerings;  "statutes";  title.  Num.  XV:15    (A. 

V.  "ordinances"). 
Num.  XV:17-21,  Heave  offerings;  a  "statute." 
Num.  XV:22-29,  Offering  for  sins  of  ignorance;  a 

"statute." 
Num.  XV:30-31,  The  presumptuous  sinner  to  be  cut 

off;  a  "statute." 
Num.  XV  :32-36,  Narrative  of  the  man  who  gathered 

sticks  on  the  Sabbath,  and  of  his  punishment. 
Num.  XV:37-41,  Fringes  for  garments;  a  "statute." 
Num.  XVI:  1-50,    Narrative    of    the    rebellion    of 

Korah,  Dathan  and  Abiram,  and  of  their  pun- 
ishment. 
Num.  XVII:  1-13,  Narrative  of  the  test  of  rods,  and 

of  the  budding  of  Aaron's  rod;  this  narrative 

naturally  growing  out  of  the  rebellion  of  Korah, 

Dathan  and  Abiram. 
Num.  XVIII:  1-32,  Various  "statutes,"  some  of  them 

with  titles,  in  detail  as  follows : 
Num.  XVIII:  1-7,  Rights  and  prerogatives  of  priests 

and  Levites ;  without  title. 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  57 

Num.  XVIII :8-19,  The  priests'  portion;  a  "statute," 
title  XVIII  :8  (A.  V.  "Ordinance")  also  11  and 
19. 

Num.  XVIII  :20-32,  The  portion  of  Levites  and  their 
offerings ;  a  "statute,"  title  XVIII  :23. 

Num.  XIX  :1-10,  Sacrifice  of  the  red  heifer;  a  "stat- 
ute," title  XIX  :2  (R.  V.  "Ordinance")  and  10. 

Num.  XIX:  11-22,  The  water  of  separation  and  the 
use  of  it ;  a  "statute,"  title  XIX  :21. 

Num.  XX-XXI:35,  The  murmuring  of  Israel,  the 
refusal  of  Edom  to  allow  passage,  the  fiery  ser- 
pents, and  the  overcoming  of  Arad  and  of  Sihon. 

Num.  XXII-XXIV:25,  The  narrative  of  Balak  and 
Balaam  which  naturally  introduces  the  narra- 
tive at  the  end  of  the  wilderness  pilgrimage  and 
the  laws  which  were  given  then. 

Num.  XXV:1-18,  Narrative  of  Midianitish  whore- 
dom and  idolatry,  and  its  punishment. 

Num.  XXVI:  1-65,  The  numbering  of  the  people  in 
the  plain  of  Moab. 

Num.  XXVII  :1-11,  The  narrative  of  the  case  of  the 
daughters  of  Zelophehad  and  the  statute  for 
their  inheritance  together  with  the  list  of  laws 
relative  to  this  subject;  entitled  with  nice  dis- 
crimination a  "statute  of  judgment."  For  it 
was  a  matter  "one  with  another"  and  so  a  "judg- 
ment," but  it  was  a  special  case  for  which  there 
was  no  "judgment"  and  the  special  law  given 
to  meet  the  case  was  not  of  things  patently 
mala  in  se.  It  was  rather  a  special  regulation 
to  mitigate  hardship  and  the  law  was  of  things 
mala  prohibita.  Thus  it  is  appropriately  called 
"a  statute  of  judgment." 

Num.  XXVII:  12-14,  Narrative  of  the  command  to 


58  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

Moses  to  view  the  land  from  the  mountain-top. 

Num.  XXVII  :15-17,  Moses'  request  for  succession. 

Num.  XXVII:  18-23,  Narrative  of  the  choosing  of 
Joshua  as  Moses'  successor. 

Num.  XXVIII:  1-15,  Laws  of  offerings;  "statutes." 
Another  illustration  of  the  "line  upon  line" 
method  used  in  the  wilderness  instruction. 
Moses  was  not  primarily  a  writer  upon  law, 
but  a  lecturer  upon  law  before  a  class,  and  the 
wilderness  was  his  lecture-room.  From  time 
to  time  Moses  instructed  the  people,  ever  chang- 
ing in  its  personnel  as  the  people  shifted  about 
between  home  and  the  care  of  the  flocks  and 
as  new  generations  grew  up.  So  Moses  reiter- 
ates the  laws  most  essential,  and,  in  the  Penta- 
teuch, we  have  a  report  of  these  instructions 
from  day  to  day.  Probably  in  nearly  every 
instance  the  expression,  "And  the  Lord  spake 
unto  Moses,"  marks  the  lesson  of  a  day,  and 
the  command  was  often  supplemented  by  the 
words  "Speak  unto  the  people." 

Num.  XXVII  :16-XXIX:40,  Feast  Days  and  their 
offerings ;  "statute." 

Num.  XXX:  1-16,  "Between  a  man  and  his  wife, 
between  a  father  and  his  daughter"  ;  "statutes." 
These  were  laws  concerning  things  "one  with 
another,"  but  they  had  none  of  the  other  char- 
acteristics of  "judgments."  They  were  special 
regulations  and  distinctly  called  "statutes,"  and 
properly  so.  The  title  is  found  in  Num.  XXX  :16. 

Num.  XXXI:l-20,  Narrative  of  the  Midianites 
spoiled  and  Balaam  slain. 

Num.  XXXI:21-24,  Directions  for  purifying  the 
spoil;  "statute." 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  59 

Num.  XXXI:25-54,  Directions  for  the  division  of 
the  spoil,  "statute." 

Num.  XXXII:  1-42,  Narrative  of  the  settling  of 
Reuben  and  Gad  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  and  a 
narrative  of  the  journeys  thus  completed. 

Num.  XXXIII  :l-49,  A  tabulated  list  of  the  jour- 
neys in  the  wilderness  with  brief  mention  of 
incidents  by  the  way. 

Num.  XXXIII  :50-56,  Instruction  for  the  further 
progress  until  the  full  occupation  of  the  land. 
If  these  be  accounted  laws,  they  are  "statutes," 
being  special  directions  and  regulations.  Such 
directions  to  be  carried  out  but  once,  are  seldom 
given  the  title  "statutes,"  as  already  noticed. 

Num.  XXXIV:  1-13,  The  borders  and  bounds  of  the 
Land  of  Promise;  of  the  nature  of  statutory 
directions. 

Num.  XXXIV:  14-29,  Appointment  of  the  persons 
who  should  represent  the  tribes  in  the  division 
of  the  land.  This  narrative,  like  the  preceding 
one,  is  of  the  nature  of  statutory  directions,  but 
without  any  title  within  the  narrative. 

Num.  XXXV:  1-8,  Assignment  of  the  cities  of  the 
Levites,  including  the  cities  of  refuge. 

Num.  XXXV:  9-34,  Law  of  murder  in  various  de- 
grees; "judgments,"  so  entitled  explicitly,  Num. 
XXXV  :24.  Also  the  title  "statute  of  judgment" 
is  applied  especially  to  the  law  of  cities  of  re- 
fuge, Num.  XXXV:27-29,  title  29. 

The  character  of  the  law  of  the  cities  of 
refuge  is,  also,  indicated  by  the  expression  "un- 
til he  stand  before  the  congregation  in  judg- 
ment." But  being  a  special  statute  mitigating 
the  law  of  homicide,  it  is  called  a  "statute  of 


60  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

judgment."  Here  again  is  the  most  discriminat- 
ing use  of  the  words  "statute"  and  "judgment." 
This  law  of  the  cities  of  refuge  and  the  avenger 
of  blood  has  to  do  with  homicide  and  thus  far 
is  a  "judgment,"  but  it  is,  also,  a  special  regula- 
tion to  guard  against  mistakes  and  mitigate 
harshness  in  the  "judgment"  and  so  is,  in  this 
respect,  statutory  in  character.  Thus  this  law 
is  called  a  "statute  of  judgment."  It  is  incon- 
ceivable that  this  expression  should  ever  have 
arisen  at  all,  except  that  these  words  "judg- 
ment" and  "statute"  were  technical  terms.  If 
only  general  terms  without  very  specific  mean- 
ing, the  joining  of  them  together  thus  would 
be  unnecessary,  and  without  definite  signifi- 
cance, if,  indeed,  any  significance  at  all.  This 
use  of  them  together  shows  that  each  had  a  very 
distinct  shade  of  meaning  that  could  be  com- 
bined with  the  other  to  give  also  a  discriminat- 
ing sense. 

Num.  XXXV:30-34.  These  verses  following  the 
"statute  of  judgment"  are,  also,  special  regula- 
tions for  the  hedging  about  of  "judgments"  in 
the  case  of  murder  that  the  "judgment"  did  not 
result  in  harshness  and  cruelty,  and  so  are  "stat- 
utes of  judgment,"  though  without  title.  As 
often  in  other  cases,  these  laws  are  conformed 
to  the  character  of  the  laws  in  the  list  in  which 
they  are  found. 

Num.  XXXVI:  1-12,  Narrative  of  a  second  petition 
concerning  the  inheritance  of  daughters,  citing 
the  case  of  the  daughters  of  Zelophehad.  No 
title  is  here  found,  but  the  character  of  the 
legislation  is  clearly  statutory  and,  at  the  same 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  61 

time,  pertains  to  matters  "one  with  another," 
and  so  is  a  "statute  of  judgment,"  though  with- 
out title  here.  The  previous  legislation  con- 
cerning inheritance  of  daughters  was  so  de- 
nominated; Num.  XXVII  :11. 
Num.  XXXVI:  13,  Gives  title  to  alFthe  laws  "which 
the  Lord  commanded  by  the  hand  of  Moses 
unto  the  children  of  Israel  in  the  plains  of  Moab 
by  Jordan  near  Jericho,"  Num.  XXII  :1- 
XXXVI:  13.  The  title  here  given  is  "command- 
ments and  judgments."  Commandments,  in 
the  general  sense,  being  employed  to  denote  all 
the  directions  and  instructions  immediately 
given,  and  the  "judgments,"  those  "judgings" 
which  were  promulgated  by  God's  authoriza- 
tion. 

DEUTERONOMY 

Deut.  1:1-111:29.  Deuteronomy  begins  with  a  nar- 
rative of  the  contents  of  the  book,  distinctly  de- 
claring it  to  contain  the  "words  which  Moses 
spake  unto  all  Israel  on  this  side  of  Jordan  in  the 
wilderness."  This  is  followed  by  a  description 
of  the  place,  which  is  probably  intended  to  de- 
note the  geographical  boundaries  of  the  "wilder- 
ness," though  it  is  not  now  possible  to  locate 
all  the  points  mentioned.  Again,  in  the  fifth 
verse,  the  expression  "on  this  side  Jordan,"  is 
clearly  defined  as  "in  the  land  of  Moab,"  where 
began  Moses  to  declare  this  law. 

Next  follows  the  various  addresses  of  Moses, 
four  in  number,  which  make  up  nearly  all  of 
the  book.  The  first  address  is  a  running  nar- 
rative which  introduces  from  time  to  time  brief 


62  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

lists  of  laws  given  at  various  times  throughout 
the  journeyings  from  Sinai  onward,  now  re- 
capitulated. Verses  6-8  recount  the  order  to 
depart  from  Sinai. 

Deut.  1:9-17,  A  succinct  narrative  of  the  first  ap- 
pointment of  judges  and  of  the  arrangement 
for  appeals. 

Deut.  1 :18,  A  summing  up  of  the  "judgments"  in  Ex. 
XXI:2-XXIII:19. 

Deut.  1:19-111:29,  A  narrative  of  the  wilderness 
journeys  to  Kadesh  Barnea  and  then  of  the 
wanderings  all  the  way  to  the  edge  of  the 
Promised  Land. 

Deut.  IV:  1-13,  The  introduction  to  the  legal  portion 
of  the  address.  At  the  very  outset,  Moses  an- 
nounces the  "statutes"  and  the  "judgments,"  IV : 
1,  and  repeats  the  title  at  IV  :5.  In  the  second 
part  of  the  introduction  he  makes  particular 
mention  of  the  Decalogue,  giving  a  brief  ac- 
count of  the  events  of  its  giving  and  denom- 
inates the  covenant  by  the  name  "words"  (Cf. 
Heb.)  Deut.  IV:  13,  elsewhere  also  equated  with 
the  word  "commandments."  In  Deut.  IV  :2  the 
word  "commandments"  is  used  in  its  general 
sense  to  denote  all  the  laws  of  God. 

Deut.  IV:  14-24,  Moses  now  takes  up  his  address,  and 
in  doing  so  resumes  the  title  given  at  IV  :1, 
"statutes"  and  "judgments"  given  "before 
time,"  IV:14,  which  were  recorded  in  Ex. 
XXIII  :1-XL  :38,  and  the  whole  book  of  Leviticus 
with  the  beginning  of  the  journeys  recorded  in 
Numbers ;  all  of  which  is  distinctly  said  to  have 
taken  place  "before  that  time." 

Deut.  IV  :25-40,  Moses  proceeds  with  the  account  of 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  6» 

the  laws,  not  giving  them  all  in  detail,  but 
dwelling  especially  upon  the  "commandments," 
and  then  in  verse  40  refers  to  what  he  has  said 
by  giving  the  title  "statutes"  and  "command- 
ments." 

Deut.  IV  :41-49,  Narrative  of  the  closing  part  of  the 
journeys  and  a  summing  up  of  the  legislation 
in  the  words,  Deut.  IV  :45,  "these  are  the  testi- 
monies and  the  statutes  and  the  judgments." 
This  closes  the  first  address.  This  title  of  the 
whole  address  uses  "testimonies"  for  "com- 
mandments," as  is  done  elsewhere,  and  already 
noticed  in  the  discussion  of  the  word  "com- 
mandments"   (p.  9). 

Deut.  V:1-XXVI:19,  Presents  the  second  address  of 
Moses.  It  gives  in  the  form  of  popular  address, 
a  presentation  of  the  whole  law.  This  gives  to 
the  book  the  character  indicated  by  its  name, 
Deuteronomy,  the  Second  Law.  This  part  of 
the  book  thus  includes  "commandments"  and 
"statutes"  and  "judgments"  with  the  occurrence 
of  many  titles  adapted  to  the  individual  group 
of  laws  to  which  each  is  attached.  Once  the  word 
"covenant"  is  used,  Deut.  V:l-2,  referring  to 
laws  called  the  Book  of  the  Covenant,  Ex. 
XXIV:  7,  consisting  of  the  Decalogue,  a  few 
"statutes"  for  general  direction  in  worship,  and 
especially  the  long  list  of  "judgments";  in  all, 
Ex.  XX:1-XXIII:19.  Sometimes  two  titles  oc- 
cur together,  sometimes  three,  but  always  the 
various  kinds  of  laws  denoted  in  the  title  are 
found  in  the  list  of  which  it  is  the  title.  The 
title  of  all  the  laws  is  given  in  Deut.  V  :31,  where 
"commandments"  is  added  to  the  title  at  V:l, 


64  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

making  it  "commandments  and  statutes  and 
judgments."  Again,  in  VI  :1  and  in  VI:17, 
reference  to  the  list  of  laws  is  made  with  "com- 
mandments and  testimonies  and  statutes."  This 
may  seem  an  exception  to  the  use  of  the  techni- 
cal terms,  or  it  may  be  simply  the  use  of  the 
general  terms  "commandments"  and  "testi- 
monies" with  "statutes"  as  a  technical  term. 
At  VI  :20  the  full  title  again  occurs  with  "testi- 
monies" used  for  "commandments"  (p.  9). 
In  VI:24,  mention  is  made  only  of  "statutes." 
This  again  might  seem  an  exception.  The  case 
was  this:  the  direction  was  given  for  a  father 
"if  thy  son  asketh  thee  in  time  to  come,  and 
say  'What  mean  the  testimonies  and  the  stat- 
utes and  the  judgments,  which  the  Lord  our 
God  hath  commanded  you',"  the  Israelite  should 
explain  the  matter  to  the  boy.  Now  what  would 
be  in  the  mind  of  the  boy  most  ?  manifestly  what 
was  constantly  in  his  sight,  the  "statutes"  of 
the  ceremonial  law;  these  were  constantly 
visible,  the  "commandments"  and  the  "judg- 
ments" only  occasionally,  when  crime  was 
punished.  So  the  father  was  to  say  to  his  son 
"and  the  Lord  commanded  us  to  do  all  these 
statutes,"  the  things  that  attracted  the  atten- 
tion of  the  boy.  Then  he  describes  the  re- 
mainder of  the  law  in  the  expression,  "And  fear 
the  Lord  our  God  for  our  good  always  that  he 
might  preserve  us  alive,  as  it  is  this  day."  Then 
the  father  adds,  "And  it  shall  be  our  righteous- 
ness, if  we  observe  to  do  all  these  command- 
ments before  the  Lord  our  God,  as  he  hath 
commanded  us."    He  first  mentioned  the  "stat- 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  65 

utes"  because  they  were  in  the  sight  of  the  boy 
and  attracted  his  attention,  then  he  described 
the  other  laws,  but  when  he  comes  to  speak  of 
their  "righteousness"   he   mentions  the  "com- 
mandments," the  moral  law  of  which  the  "judg- 
ments" were  but  enactment  in  detail,  by  the 
keeping  of  which,  and  not  by  the  doing  of  the 
"statutes,"  did  they  acquire  "righteousness." 
Deut.  VII:1-11,  Another  list  of  laws;  the  full  three- 
fold title  appears  at  VII  :11,  "commandments, 
statutes    and    judgments,"    to    each    of    which 
classes  of  laws  reference  is  made  in  this  list. 
Deut.  VII:  12-26,  Another  remarkable  passage  which 
contains  a  discriminating  use  of  these  techni- 
cal words.    While  in  VII  :11,  the  full  three-fold 
title  is  used  of  the  whole  law,  in  VII:  12,  which 
begins  a   passage   recounting  the    ground    of 
righteousness  as  in  VI:25,  "judgments"  only 
are  mentioned,  as  has  already  been  pointed  out 
in  the  discussion  of  the  technical  terms    (p. 
17  Cf.  84). 
Deut.  VIII:  1-20,  An  exhortation  to  obedience  to  all 
the  commandments  of  the    Lord.      The    word 
"commandments"  in  its  general  sense  occurs  in 
verses  1,  2,  6,  and  the  technical  title  "command- 
ments, judgments  and  statutes,"  in  reference  to 
all  the  laws  in  detail,  at  verse  11. 
Deut.  IX:  1-29,  Narrative  of  Israel's  rebellion  and  of 

the  death  of  Aaron. 
Deut.  X  :1-11,  Narrative  of  the  renewing  of  the  tables 
of  the  law,  some  of  the  journeyings,  and  the 
separation  of  the  Levites. 
Deut.  X:12-XI:31,  Exhortation  to  obedience;  title 
X:13,    "commandments    and    statutes,"    where 


66  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

commandments  is  put  for  the  fundamental  law 
and  the  "judgments"  which  enforced  it,  and 
over  against  these  is  set  the  "statutes."  The 
full  title  is  given  at  XI  :1  and  manifestly  refers 
to  all  the  "commandments"  and  the  "judg- 
ments" and  the  "statutes."  "Commandments" 
in  the  general  sense  is  used  in  XI  :8,  13,  22,  27. 

Deut.  XI:32-XXVI:16,  Presents  a  list  of  "statutes 
and  judgments."  XI:32  gives  the  title,  "stat- 
utes and  judgments,"  and  XII  :1  announces 
"These  are  the  statutes  and  the  judgments,  etc." 
Then  follows  the  list  of  laws.  The  chapter  divi- 
sion in  our  English  Bibles  unfortunately  divided 
the  title  in  the  midst.  The  whole  list  in  detail 
is  as  follows: 

Deut.  XII:2-3,  Destruction  of  places  of  worship  of 
the  nation;  a  "statute." 

Deut.  XII:4-14,  Law  of  the  central  sanctuary;  a 
"statute." 

Deut.  XII:15-16,  Flesh  with  blood  forbidden;  a 
"statute." 

Deut.  XII:  17-18,  Religious  offerings  and  vows  to  be 
at  the  central  place  of  worship;  a  "statute." 

Deut.  XII:  19,  Care  of  the  Levite;  a  "statute." 

Deut.  XII  :20-28,  Eating  of  flesh  at  home,  without 
the  blood,  but  holy  things  and  vows  should  be 
at  the  central  place  of  worship ;  a  "statute." 

Deut.  XII:29-32,  Prohibition  to  worship  God  after 
the  manner  of  the  heathen  worship ;  a  "statute." 

Deut.  XIII:  1-5,  Law  against  false  prophets;  a  "stat- 
ute." "Commandments"  in  the  general  sense 
is  used  at  Deut.  XIII  :4. 

Deut.  XIII:6-11,  Law  against  enticement  to  blas- 
phemy; a  "judgment." 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  67 

Deut.  XIII:12-18,  Apostasy  of  a  city;  a  "judgment." 
"Commandments"  in  the  general  sense  at  XIII : 
18. 

Deut.  XIV :  1-2,  Law  against  mutilation  for  the  dead ; 
a  "statute." 

Deut.  XIV:3-8,  Unclean  beasts  forbidden  for  food; 
a  "statute." 

Deut.  XIV:9-10,  Law  of  unclean  things  of  the 
water;  a  "statute." 

Deut.  XIV:ll-20,  Law  of  clean  and  unclean  flying 
things;  a  "statute." 

Deut.  XIV  :21,  Prohibition  to  seethe  a  kid  in  its 
mother's  milk;  a  "judgment"  probably. 

Deut.  XIV  :22,  Law  of  tithings ;  a  "statute." 

Deut.  XIV:23-26,  Tithes  and  the  first  fruits  to  be 
eaten  in  the  central  place  of  worship  and  its 
value  to  be  used  at  the  same  place,  if  the  dis- 
tance be  too  far  to  carry  the  offering  there;  a 
"statute." 

Deut.  XIV :27,  The  Levite  not  to  be  forsaken;  a 
"statute." 

Deut.  XIV  :28-29,  Special  use  of  tithes  for  the  Levite 
and  the  stranger,  the  fatherless  and  the  widow ; 
a  "statute." 

Deut.  XV  :1-18,  The  seventh  year  of  release ;  a  "stat- 
ute" :  "commandment"  used  in  the  general  sense 
at  XV  :5. 

Deut.  XV:  19-23,  The  firstling  male  of  the  flock 
holy  unto  the  Lord ;  the  sacrifice  to  be  made  at 
the  central  place  of  worship;  if  blemished,  to 
be  eaten  at  home,  but  without  the  blood;  a 
"statute." 

Deut.  XVI:  1-8,  Law  of  the  Passover;  a  "statute." 

Deut.  XVI:9-12,  The  Feast  of  Weeks;  a  "statute"; 
title  XVI:  12. 


68  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

Deut.  XVI:13-15,  The  Feast  of  Tabernacles;  a 
"statute." 

Deut.  XVI:  16-17,  Males  required  to  appear  before 
the  Lord  three  times  a  year;  a  "statute." 

Deut.  XVI:18-20,  Appointment  of  judges  and  cer- 
tain judgments  against  perversion  of  justice, 
partiality  in  judgment  and  bribery;  "judg- 
ments." 

Deut.  XVI:21-22,  Law  against  idolatry;  as  idolatry 
was  elsewhere  punished  by  the  courts  with 
physical  punishment,  this  would  seem  to  be  a 
"judgment."    Cf.  XVII:2. 

Deut.  XVII  :1,  Blemished  animals  not  to  be  sacri- 
ficed; a  "statute." 

Deut.  XVII  :2-7,  Law  concerning  idolatry;  a  "judg- 
ment." 

Deut.  XVII:8-11,  Establishment  of  an  appellate 
court,  a  law  of  procedure,  a  "statute,"  though 
the  sentences  of  the  appellate  court  were  called 
"judgments,"  and  properly  XVII  :11.  The  word 
"judgment"  occurs,  also,  at  XVII  :8-9. 

Deut.  XVII:  12-13,  Concerning  contumacy  toward 
the  court,  contempt  of  court ;  a  matter  "one  with 
another"  when  the  "other"  is  the  court.  The 
law  was  administered  also  by  the  court;  hence 
a  "judgment." 

Deut.  XVII:  14-20,  Directions  for  the  king;  "stat- 
utes"; entitled  "statutes"  XVII:  19.  The  word 
"commandments,"  in  the  general  sense  is  at 
XVII  :20. 

Deut.  XVIII  :l-8.  Portion  of  the  Levites ;  a  "statute." 

Deut.  XVIII  :9-14,  Prohibition  of  child-sacrifice, 
enchanters,  consulters  of  familiar  spirits, 
wizards,  necromancers;  "judgments." 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  69 

Deut.  XVIII:  15-22,  Narrative  of  the  prophecy  of  a 
prophet  like  unto  Moses. 

Deut.  XIX:1-10,  Law  of  cities  of  refuge,  "statute 
of  judgment,"  but  without  title  here.  (  Cf.  p. 
59-60).  "Commandments"  in  the  general  sense 
at  XIX  :9. 

Deut.  XIX:11-13,  Rejection  and  punishment  of 
murderers  who  flee  to  the  cities  of  refuge;  a 
"judgment." 

Deut.  XIX:  14,  Removal  of  landmarks,  i.e.,  fraud;  a 
"judgment." 

Deut.  XIX  :15,  Condemnation  not  to  be  by  one  wit- 
ness ;  a  "statute"  of  law  of  legal  procedure. 

Deut.  XIX:  16-21,  Law  against  false  witnessing;  a 
"judgment." 

Deut.  XX:  1-20,  Procedure  in  war,  special  regula- 
tions of  matters  "one  with  another,"  hence  a 
"statute  of  judgment,"  but  without  title. 

Deut.  XXI:  1-9,  Expiation  of  uncertain  murder;  a 
"statute." 

Deut.  XXI:  10-14,  Mitigation  of  the  condition  of 
captives  in  war;  a  "statute  of  judgment." 

Deut.  XXI:  15-17,  Mitigation  of  polygamy;  a  "stat- 
ute of  judgment." 

Deut.  XXI:18-21,  Contumacy  in  a  son;  a  "statute 
of  judgment." 

Deut.  XXI  :22-23,  Early  burial  of  a  man  hanged ;  a 
"statute  of  judgment." 

Deut.  XXII  :l-3,  Restoration  of  things  lost;  a  "judg- 
ment." 

Deut.  XXII :4,  Against  cruelty;  a  "judgment." 

Deut,  XXII :5,  Masquerading  as  women  or  men;  for 
the  welfare  of  the  state  and  against  harm  to  the 
individual;  a  "judgment." 


70  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

Deut.  XXII :6-7,  Game  laws;  "judgments." 

Deut.  XXII :8,  Building  laws;  "judgments." 

Deut.  XXII :9,  Horticultural  laws;  "judgments." 

Deut.  XXII  :10,  Against  cruelty  to  animals ;  a  "judg- 
ment." 

Deut.  XXII  :11,  Clothing  regulations.  It  is  impos- 
sible to  know  the  purpose  of  these  laws  and  so 
impossible  to  say  whether  they  are  "statutes" 
or  "judgments."  If  health  laws,  they  would  be 
"judgments";  if  ceremonial  laws,  they  would  be 
"statutes." 

Deut.  XXII:  12,  Law  of  fringes  for  vesture;  a  "stat- 
ute." 

Deut.  XXII:13-21,  Law  against  the  slaying  of  a 
wife  by  her  husband;  a  "judgment." 

Deut.  XXII :22,  Law  against  adultery;  a  "judg- 
ment." 

Deut.  XXII:23-24,  Against  fornication  with  a  be- 
trothed woman;  a  "judgment." 

Deut.  XXII:25-29,  Outrage  of  a  virgin;  a  "judg- 
ment." 

Deut.  XXII :30,  Incest;  a  "judgment." 

Deut.  XXIII:  1-6,  Class  of  persons  forbidden  sanc- 
tuary; a  "statute,"  or  "statute  of  judgment." 

Deut.  XXIII  :7-8,  Mention  of  persons  not  to  be  ab- 
horred; a  "statute,"  or  a  "statute  of  judgment." 

Deut.  XXIII  :9,  Against  cruelty  in  war,  a  "judg- 
ment." 

Deut.  XXIII  :10-11,  Purification  of  personal  un- 
cleanness;  a  "statute." 

Deut.  XXIII  :15-16,  Sanctuary  for  run-away  slaves, 
a  mitigation  of  slavery;  a  "judgment"  or  "stat- 
ute of  judgment." 

Deut.  XXIII :17-18,  Against  whoredom  and  sodomy; 
"judgments." 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  71 

Deut.  XXIII:  19-20,  Usury;  a  "judgment." 

Deut.  XXIII  :21-23,  Blasphemy,  and  irreverence  in 
breaking  vows;  a  "judgment." 

Deut.  XXIII  :24-25,  Public  rights  in  private  property 
in  certain  instances,  the  right  of  eminent  do- 
main; a  "judgment." 

Deut.  XXIV :l-4.  Divorce;  a  "judgment." 

Deut.  XXIV  :5,  Exemption  from  military  service  for 
the  newly  married;  a  "judgment,"  or  a  "statute 
of  judgment"  according  to  whether  the  law  was 
a  customary  one  or  an  unusual  and  special  one 
only  among  Israelites. 

Deut.  XXIV :6,  Pledges  for  obligation;  a  "judg- 
ment." 

Deut.  XXIV :7,  Man-stealing;  a  "judgment." 

Deut.  XXIV :8-9,  A  health  law  in  leprosy;  a  "judg- 
ment," a  "judgment"  that  enforces  a  "statute." 

Deut.  XXIV:  10-13,  Pledges,  especially  of  the  poor; 
"judgments." 

Deut.  XXIV:14-15,  Oppression  of  servants;  a  "judg- 
ment." 

Deut.  XXIV:  16,  One  not  to  be  put  to  death  for  an- 
other; a  "judgment." 

Deut.  XXIV:17-18,  Perversion  of  judgment;  a 
"judgment." 

Deut.  XXIV:19-22,  Poor  laws;  "judgments";  in 
modern  life,  laws  of  the  Board  of  Charities. 

Deut.  XXV:  1-3,  Laws  of  court-procedure  in  crim- 
inal cases;  "statutes,"  perhaps  "statutes  of 
judgment." 

Deut.  XXV  :4,  The  purpose  of  this  law  is  not  now 
clear,  but  it  was  probably  to  prevent  cruelty  to 
animals;  so  a  "judgment." 

Deut.  XXV:5-10,  Law  of  the  redemption  of  a 
brother's  right;  a  "judgment." 


72  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

Deut.  XXV  :11-12,  Unnatural  cruelty ;  a  "judgment." 

Deut.  XXV:13-16,  Fraud;  a  "judgment." 

Deut.  XXV:17-19,  Narrative  of  the  judgment  of 
Amalek. 

Deut.  XXVI:  1-11,  Law  of  First  Fruits;  a  "statute." 

Deut.  XXVI:  12-15,  Law  concerning  the  tithes;  a 
"statute."  The  word  "commandments"  occurs 
in  its  general  sense  at  XXVI:  13. 

Deut.  XXVI  :16,  A  repetition  of  the  title  of  this  long 
list  of  laws  from  XI  :32  on  to  this  point,  "stat- 
utes and  judgments." 

Deut.  XXVI:  17-19,  Conclusion  of  this  second  ad- 
dress with  the  full  title  of  all  the  whole  list 
from  V:l  on  to  this  point,  "commandments, 
statutes  and  judgments." 

Deut.  XXVII  :1-XXVIII:68,  General  directions  for 
the  erection  of  the  pillar  with  the  laws  engraved 
on  plaster,  and  the  announcement  of  blessings 
for  obedience  and  of  curses  for  disobedience. 
There  are  thus  "commandments"  and  "statutes" 
and  the  title  is  given  in  Deut.  XXVII  :1  and  10, 
XXVIII  :15,  and  45.  "Commandments"  in  the 
general  sense  occurs,  also,  in  XXVIII  :1,  9,  13. 

Deut.  XXIX:1-XXX:14,  Directions  for  making  of 
the  Covenant  in  the  land  of  Moab  relating  to 
the  laws  which  they  had  just  been  commanded 
to  engrave  on  the  plaster.  The  title,  "Com- 
mandments" and  "statutes"  occurs  at  XXX:  10, 
"commandments"  in  the  general  sense,  also,  oc- 
curs at  XXX:8  and  11. 

Deut.  XXX:15-20,  Moses  concludes  the  legal  part 
of  his  address,  summing  up  all  the  blessedness 
of  keeping  the  whole  law  "that  thou  mayest  live 
and  multiply,  and  the  Lord  thy  God  shall  bless 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  73 

thee  in  the  land  whither  thou  goest  to  possess 
it."     The  appropriate  title  here  is,  of  course, 
the  threefold  title,  "commandments"  and  "stat- 
utes" and  "judgments,"  and  it  occurs  at  Deut. 
XXX  :16. 
Deut.  XXXI:  1-30,  A  narrative  of  the    charge    of 
Moses  to  Joshua  and  concerning  the  song  of 
Moses  of  "this  book  of  the  Law."     "Command- 
ments" in  the  general  sense  occurs  at  XXXI  :5. 
Deut.  XXXII  :l-52.  The  Song  of  Moses. 
Deut.  XXXIII:  1-29,  The  blessing  which  Moses  pro- 
nounced   upon    the    tribes    before    his    death. 
"Judgments"  probably  in  the    technical    sense 
occurs,  XXXIII:  10,  also  at  XXXIII  :21,  but  no 
list  of  "judgments"  is  given  by  which  to  test  it. 
Deut.  XXXIV  :1-12,    The   conclusion  added   to   the 
book  of  Deuteronomy  recording  the  death  of 
Moses  and  the  mourning  for  him,  and  the  char- 
acter of  his  successor,  closing  with  a  brief  but 
glowing  tribute  to  the  worth  of  Moses. 
After  this  complete  analysis  of  the  books  of  the  Law 
from  the  first  giving  of  the  Law  to  the  close  of  the 
wilderness  wanderings,  it  will  be  important  to  enquire 
concerning  the  use  of  these  technical  terms  in  the  por- 
tion of  Exodus  which  precedes  the  giving  of  the  Laws, 
to  discover  v/hether  or  not  the  use  of  these  technical 
terms  is  found  there.    The  question  of  the  use  of  these 
technical  terms  in   Genesis  will  be  deferred  until  a 
later  investigation.     In  Ex.  XII  recording  the  institu- 
tion of  the  passover  and  referring  to  it,  the  law  of  that 
feast  is  always  called  a  "statute,"  though,  strange  to 
say  the  A.  V.  translated  it  by  another  word,  in  XII  :14, 
17,  24,  43;  XIII  :10  and  XVIII  :20,  by  "ordinance"  or 
"ordinances,"  in  XII  :49  by  "law."     The  use  of  "stat- 


74  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

utes"  exactly  accords  with  the  title  applied  to  the  pass- 
over  after  the  giving  of  the  Law. 

In  only  one  other  instance  is  this  word  "statute" 
used  in  Exodus  before  the  giving  of  the  Law.  In  Ex. 
XVIII  :16,  Moses  tells  Jethro  "I  judge  between  one  and 
another  and  I  do  make  them  know  the  'statutes'  of 
God  and  his  laws,"  i.e.,  he  judged  according  to  the 
"judgments"  and  made  the  people  know  the  "statutes," 
which,  again,  is  a  very  discriminating  use  of  these 
technical  terms. 

Hoq,  "statutes"  is  used  in  Ex.  V:14  in  the  sense  of 
"ways"  or  "directions"  of  a  more  general  character 
(Cf.  Heb.)  and  in  Ex.  XVI  :28,  "commandments"  is 
used  in  the  general  sense. 

Ex.  XV:25-26,  Narrative  of  events  at  Marah  in 
which  it  is  said,  "There  he  made  for  them  a  'statute' 
and  an  'ordinance'."  Here  the  A.  V.  has  used  "ordi- 
nance" for  "judgment"  (Heb.  mishpat).  This  law  in 
Ex.  XV:26,  is  thus  called  both  a  "statute"  and  a  "judg- 
ment" and  properly  so.  It  was  a  health  law  and  had  a 
punishment  annexed  to  its  violation,  yet  it  was  a  special 
regulation  and  not  a  law  concerning  a  matter  mala 
in  se. 

Ex.  XV  :26  in  the  latter  part  of  the  verse  uses  both 
"commandments"  and  "statutes,"  but  there  is  no  in- 
dication given  of  the  particular  laws  meant,  none  of 
them  are  stated.  There  is  no  reason  to  assume  that  the 
words  were  not  accurately  used. 

These  are  all  the  occurrences  of  the  use  of  these  tech- 
nical legal  terms  in  the  portion  of  Exodus  preceding 
the  giving  of  the  Law.  In  all  instances  the  words  are 
accurately  used. 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  75 

LISTS  OF  LAWS  WITH  TECHNICAL  TITLES 

From  the  preceding  complete  analysis  of  all  the 
books  of  the  law  noting  the  different  kinds  of  laws  and 
the  related  narratives,  it  is  now  possible  to  tabulate 
all  the  groups  of  laws  with  titles  specifically  men- 
tioned. An  examination  of  these  lists  and  the  exact- 
ness with  which  the  titles,  whether  simple  or  complex, 
are  used,  will  complete  the  evidence  for  the  technical 
use  of  these  law  words,  and,  indeed,  make  the  proof 
overwhelming  that  they  are  so  used.  It  is  impossible 
to  go  over  these  various  groups  in  detail  noting  the 
accuracy  and  discrimination  with  which  these  titles  are 
used  and  not  recognize  the  technical  character  of  these 
titles,  "commandments,"  "judgments"  and  "statutes." 

The  groups  of  lists  in  order  are  as  follows : 

COMMANDMENTS 

Ex.  XX:1-17;  title,  XX  :6. 
Deut.  XXVII  :l-8;  title  1. 

JUDGMENTS 

Ex.  XV:25;  title,  25. 

Ex.  XXI:1-XXIII:19,  title,  XXI  :1. 

Num.  XXXI:9-26;  title,  24,  Cf.  XXXV  :12. 

STATUTES 

Ex.  XII:  14,  17,  24,  43;  title  in  each  verse. 

Ex.  XIII  :10  with  title. 

Ex.  XXVII  :20-21 ;  title,  21. 

Ex.  XXVIII  :l-43;  title,  43. 

Ex.  XXIX:  1-46;  title,  9  and  28. 

Ex.  XXX  :17-21;  title,  21. 

Lev.  111:1-17,  title,  17. 


76  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

Lev.  VI:14-23;  title,  18  (Heb.  11). 

Lev.  VII:28-34;  title,  34. 

Lev.  VII  :35-36 ;  title,  36. 

Lev.  X:8-ll;  title,  9;  Cf.  also,  11. 

Lev.  X:  12-15;  title,  15. 

Lev.  XVI:24-34;  title,  29  and  34. 

Lev.  XVII:  1-9;  title,  7. 

Lev.  XVII:  19-28;  title,  19. 

Lev.  XXIII  :l-44;  title  14,  21  and  41. 

Lev.  XXIV:  1-4;  title,  3. 

Lev.  XXIV  :5-9;  title,  9. 

Num.  I-X;  title,  IX:12  and  14,  and  X:8. 

Num.  XV:1-16;  title,  1. 

Num.  XVIII  :4-19;  title,  8,  11  and  19. 

Num.  XVIII  :20-32;  title  23. 

Num.  XIX:  1-10;  title,  2  and  10. 

Num.  XIX:ll-22;  title,  21. 

Num.  XXX:  1-16;  title,  16. 

Deut.  XVII  :14-30;  title,  19. 

JUDGMENTS  AND  STATUTES 

Lev.  XVII:1-XIX:37;     title     XVIII  :4-5     and     26; 

XIX  :37. 
Lev.  XX:1-XXII:33;  title,   Cf.   XX:7-8;   see   note 

page  48. 
Deut.  IV:  1-49;  title,  1,  5  and  14.    Cf.  IV:40  and  45. 
Deut.  XI:32-XXVI:16;  title,  XI:32  and  XII  :1. 

COMMANDMENTS,  JUDGMENTS  AND  STATUTES 

Lev.  XVII:1-XXVI:46;  title,  XXVI  :46. 
Lev.  XXVI:  1-46;  title,  3,  15  and  46. 
Deut.  V-XXVI:19;  title,  V:31.     Cf.  V:l,  VI  :1,  17, 
24  note  in  loc.  in  detailed  comment  on  Deut. 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  77 

(p.  63-64).     VI:25,  VII  :11,  12,  note  in  loc.  in 
detailed  comment  on  Deut.    (p.  65).     VIII  :11, 
X:13,  note  m  loc.  in  detailed  comment  on  Deut. 
p.  65-66).     XI  :1     XXVI  :17. 
Deut.  XXX:15-20;  title,  XXX  :16. 

COMMANDMENTS   AND   STATUTES 

Deut.  XXVII  :1-XXVIII:68;  title,  XXVII  :10.     Cf. 

1,  also,  XXVIII  :15  and  45. 
Deut.  XXIX:1-XXX:14;  title,   XXX  :10. 

STATUTES  OF  JUDGMENT 

Lev.  XXV:l-55;  title,  18. 
Num.  XXVII  :1-11;  title,  11. 
Num.  XXXV:27-29;  title,  29. 

COMMANDMENTS  AND  JUDGMENTS 

Num.  XXII:1-XXXVI:13;  title,   XXXVI  :13. 

PECULIARITIES  AND  DIFFICULTIES 

5.  All  the  books  containing  the  Law  have  now  been 
examined  in  detail.  Every  instance  of  the  use  of  these 
technical  law  terms,  "Commandments,"  "statutes"  and 
"judgments"  has  been  considered  and  the  discriminat- 
ing use  of  these  terms  has  been  found  to  be  every- 
where maintained.  Laws  denominated  "judgments" 
are  found  to  be  exclusively  "judgments";  those  de- 
nominated "commandments"  are  found  to  be  "com- 
mandments" ;  and  those  denominated  "statutes,"  to  be 
"statutes."  Groups  of  laws  having  complex  titles  have 
in  them  always  the  various  kinds  of  laws  indicated  by 
those  titles  and  no  others.  In  places  where  parts  of 
complex  groups  of  laws  have  simple  sub-titles,  these 
sub-titles  are,  also,  found  to  be  used  with  accuracy  for 


78  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

those  sub-groups.  The  technical  character  and  use  of 
these  law  terms  is  thus  absolutely  established.  The 
terms  "judgments"  and  "statutes"  have  very  extended 
technical  use.  The  term  "commandments"  has  but  a 
limited  technical  use,  but  is  clear  as  to  that  limited 
use. 

From  the  foregoing  definite  statements  concerning 
the  significance  of  these  technical  legal  terms  and  the 
unvarying  uniformity  of  the  use  of  them  in  the  Penta- 
teuch it  is  not  to  be  understood  that  there  are  no  dif- 
ficult cases,  no  instances  of  peculiar  use  of  these  vv^ords. 
The  variety  and  subtlety  of  legal  concepts  make  such 
difficulties  a  certainty.  There  are  difficulties  and 
there  are  instances  of  very  peculiar  use  of  these  words. 
Every  word  of  extended  use  in  any  language  is  sure  to 
have  some  instances  of  peculiar  use.  Indeed,  all  lan- 
guage is  but  the  embodiment  of  the  struggle  to  express 
perfectly  the  ideas  of  the  human  mind.  Considering 
the  wide  scope  of  the  Pentateuchal  legislation,  and  the 
great  variety  of  subjects  to  which  the  laws  relate,  it 
could  not  be  otherwise  than  that  there  should  be  some 
difficulties  and  peculiarities  with  which  to  deal  in  con- 
sidering these  technical  terms.  The  wonder  rather  is 
that  there  are  so  few  such  difficulties  and  peculiarities. 
Most  of  the  difficulties  that  are  actually  found  are  so 
easily  resolved  upon  a  moment's  thought,  that  no  fur- 
ther consideration  need  be  given  them  than  has  al- 
ready been  given  in  the  examination  in  detail  of  all  the 
instances  of  the  use  of  these  technical  terms.  A  few 
instances,  however,  of  the  peculiar  use  of  these  techni- 
cal legal  terms  present  such  difficulties  as  to  require, 
for  entire  satisfaction,  some  more  extended  considera- 
tion. 

Almost  the  very  first  instance  of  the  use  of  the  word 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  79 

"judgments"  in  its  technical  sense  is  one  of  the  most 
difficult,  and  at  the  same  time  most  illuminating,  of 
all  the  instances  of  the  use  of  this  word.  At  Marah, 
there  was  a  miracle  wrought  for  the  sweetening  of  the 
water,  of  which  we  have  account  in  Ex.  XV:23-26. 
The  incident  is  made  the  occasion  for  legal  enactment 
for  the  future  guidance  of  the  people.  This  enactment 
is  called  both  a  "statute"  and  a  "judgment"  (A.  V. 
"ordinance,"  but  Heb.  mishpat,  "judgment").  This 
seems,  at  first  sight,  a  confusion  of  terms,  and  an  ex- 
ception to  the  uniformity  of  the  technical  use  of  these 
terms,  "statutes"  and  "judgments."  In  reality  it  is 
not  so :  it  is  such  a  discriminating  use  of  terms  as  tends 
to  strengthen  the  case  for  the  exact  technical  use  of 
these  words.  The  instructions  concerning  the  sweeten- 
ing of  the  waters  were  strictly  "directions,"  "regula- 
tions," arbitrary  enactments  of  the  law-giver,  not 
"judgments,"  i.e.,  decisions  of  judges,  not  a  law  con- 
cerning a  matter  "one  with  another,"  and  not  such  a 
thing  as  would  come  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
courts,  and  so  is  properly  called  a  "statute."  But  there 
is  added  to  this  a  penalty  for  disobedience  of  the 
people  in  the  future,  and  a  promise  of  great  reward 
for  obedience,  which  at  once  give  to  the  "statute"  the 
general  character,  also,  of  a  "judgment."  While  the 
far-reaching  blessings  of  the  promise  and  the  execu- 
tion of  the  penalty,  belong  exclusively  to  the  supreme 
Judge,  yet  the  determination  of  the  disobedience  might 
often  rightly  pass  before  the  courts  of  the  people.  So 
this  law  is  called  also  a  "judgment." 

There  are  also  two  laws  which  are  called  "statutes 
of  judgment,"  and  some  other  laws  which  are  plainly 
of  the  same  character,  though  without  title  expressed. 

Num.  XXVII  :1-11   is  entitled  a  "statute  of  judg- 


80  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

ment";  Num.  XXVII  :11.  This  passage  recounts  the 
appeal  on  behalf  of  the  daughters  of  Zelophehad  for 
their  inheritance  and  the  law  enacted  to  meet  such 
cases.  This  law  was  a  special  regulation  in  a  matter 
in  which  the  courts  provided  no  relief,  a  subject  on 
which  there  was  no  law  known  among  the  people  and 
so  was  distinctly  a  "statute."  But  this  "statute"  dealt 
entirely  with  a  matter  "one  with  another,"  a  question 
of  inheritance  usually  adjusted  by  the  courts,  and  so 
was,  also,  of  the  nature  of  a  "judgment."  With  nice 
discrimination  in  the  use  of  technical  terms  it  is  called 
a  "statute  of  judgment." 

The  law  of  the  cities  of  refuge  in  Num.  XXXV  :9-34 
is,  also,  called  a  "statute  of  judgment";  Num.  XXXV: 
29.  This  law  was  certainly,  in  the  first  instance,  a 
"statute."  For,  so  far  from  being  a  decision  of  the 
judges,  it  was  an  arbitrary  enactment  of  the  law- 
making power  making  special  provision  for  the  mitiga- 
tion of  the  common  "judgment"  concerning  homicide. 
No  judge  of  a  court  could  recognize  a  city  of  refuge  as 
having  any  place  in  criminal  jurisdiction  without  a 
special  "statute."  This  law  was  just  such  a  special 
"statute."  But  at  the  same  time  it  had  to  do  alto- 
gether with  a  matter  "one  with  another,"  between  an 
individual  and  another  individual,  and,  also,  between 
an  individual  and  the  state ;  it  was  a  matter  wrong  in 
itself,  i.e.  homicide;  and  so,  with  painstaking  discrim- 
ination in  the  use  of  legal  terms  and  in  the  exactness 
of  their  technical  meaning,  it  was  called  a  "statute  of 
judgment."  Here,  again,  examination  of  the  use  of 
this  expression,  instead  of  revealing  any  looseness  in 
the  use  of  the  technical  term,  only  serves  to  make  more 
emphatic  the  discriminating  use  of  words  which  had 
such  definite  technical  meaning  that  such  a  circumlo- 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  81 

cution  of  expression  was   necessary  in  order  to  be 
exact. 

EXCEPTIONS 
6.  But  are  there  no  exceptions  to  the  strictly  ac- 
curate use  of  these  law  words  as  technical  terms?  I 
do  not  find  any  instances  that  seem  to  me  to  be  real 
exceptions,  certainly  no  such  exceptions  as  militate 
against  the  truly  technical  character  of  these  words. 
Where  a  word  is  used  both  as  a  technical  term  and  as  a 
general  term  of  description,  as  are  many  words  in 
modern  languages,  there  are  certain  to  be  instances  of 
the  use  of  such  words  that  present  some  degree  of  un- 
certainty. There  are  such  instances  in  the  use  of  these 
words  in  the  Pentateuch.  In  lists  of  laws  having  titles, 
there  are  sometimes  one  or  two  laws  the  exact  char- 
acter of  which  it  is  difficult  to  determine.  A  few  of 
the  laws  are  not  now  understood.  It  is  impossible  to 
determine  whether  some  of  them  were  health  laws  or 
ceremonial  laws.  So  that,  altogether,  there  are  some 
passages  in  which  some  degree  of  obscurity  exists. 
Perhaps  some  who  allow  themselves  great  liberty,  but 
insist  upon  mechanical  exactness  in  all  those  who 
present  conservative  opinions,  may  demand  that  the 
case  shall  be  cleared  of  obscurity  at  every  point  or  the 
claim  for  technical  terms  relinquished.  But  those  who 
insist  that  the  Bible  is  "like  any  other  literature" 
should  at  least  allow  that  it  is  like  other  literature  in 
this,  that  it  is  not  mechanical,  but  human,  with  all  the 
peculiarities  necessary  to  meet  the  demands  upon  an 
imperfect  medium  of  expression  in  order  to  give  per- 
fect expression  to  infinite  variety  of  thought.  In  fact, 
rules  of  literature  never  do  mark  modes  of  expression 
into  absolutely  distinct  provinces;  there  is  a  twilight 
zone  in  the  application  of  every  rule  of  expression  in 
all  human  speech.    Yet  the  rules  have  a  real  function 


82  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

of  their  own ;  the  twilight  zones  do  not  negative  them. 
So,  the  instances  and  obscurities  in  the  use  of  these 
technical  terms  do  not  constitute  any  exceptions  that 
diminish  the  technical  character  of  these  words. 

There  are  a  few  instances  of  the  use  of  these  words 
which  seem,  at  first  sight,  to  present  much  the  aspects 
of  real  exceptions.  Some  may  consider  them  to  be 
such.  It  is  not  of  great  importance  whether  they  be 
exceptions  or  not.  It  is  not  absolute  uniformity  in 
the  use  of  these  technical  terms  that  is  important,  but 
prevailing  uniformity.  Prevailing  technical  use  of 
these  words  will  give  such  striking  characteristics  to 
different  parts  of  the  law  as  will  be  unaffected  by  a 
few  exceptions.  Exceptions  would  not  be  unreasonable 
or  even  surprising.  Indeed,  I  was  surprised  not  to 
find  some  very  distinct  exceptions  in  the  course  of  the 
investigations.  There  are  certainly  technical  terms  in 
English  and  American  law  which  are  not  infrequently 
used  in  a  popular  and  non-technical  way ;  this  does  not 
affect  the  technicality  of  the  legal  terms.  Anyone 
would  make  himself  ridiculous  to  set  up  the  claim  that 
they  ceased  to  be  technical  terms  by  being  used  occa- 
sionally in  a  not  very  technical  way,  even  in  books  of 
law. 

Indeed,  very  brief  examination  of  any  dictionary  of 
words  will  reveal  a  multitude  of  words  in  art,  in  archi- 
tecture, in  law,  in  nearly  every  branch  of  human  ac- 
tivity, which  have  both  a  technical,  and  a  popular  and 
non-technical,  meaning  and  use.  So  I  do  not  think  it 
important  to  maintain  that  there  are  absolutely  no  ex- 
ceptions to  the  technical  use  of  these  law  terms.  It 
v/ould  not  affect  the  results  of  the  investigation,  or  the 
validity  of  the  argument  drawn  from  it  in  the  least,  if 
such  exceptions  existed.    I  simply  record  the  fact  that 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  83 

I  have  not  found  any  instances  of  the  use  of  these 
technical  terms  which  seem  to  me  to  be  real  exceptions. 
If  some  instances  seem  to  others  to  be  objections,  there 
could  be  no  object  in  combating  such  opinion. 

There  are  a  few  instances  of  the  use  of  these  words 
which  at  first  sight  do  certainly  present  the  aspects 
of  real  exceptions.  I  v^^ill  present  the  most  important 
of  them  with  my  own  view  concerning  them,  and  leave 
the  decision  of  each  case  to  the  reader. 

The  long  passage,  Num.  XX-XXXVI:13,  with  title, 
Num.  XXXVI:  13,  might  appear  to  be  an  exception  in 
the  use  of  the  word  "commandment."  But  when  it  is 
remembered  that  the  word  "commandment"  is  so  fre- 
quently used  as  a  general  term  to  denote  any  kind  of  a 
law  of  God  or  special  direction  that  he  may  give,  and 
so  is  applicable  alike  to  "commandments,"  "judgments" 
and  "statutes"  or  to  all  considered  together,  it  is  cer- 
tainly not  straining  a  point  to  understand  the  term 
"commandment"  in  this  instance  as  covering  all  the 
other  laws  coupled  with  the  "judgments,"  for  the 
"judgments,"  which  were  decisions  of  judges,  were  not 
so  distinctly  "commandments"  of  God,  being  for  the 
most  part  only  approved  of  God  to  be  promulgated, 
whereas  the  "commandments"  and  the  "statutes"  were 
more  explicitly  enjoined  of  God. 

In  Deut.  IV  :5-6,  it  is  said :  "Behold  I  have  taught  you 
statutes  and  judgments,  even  as  the  Lord  thy  God  com- 
manded me,  that  ye  should  do  so  in  the  land  whither 
ye  go  to  possess  it :  keep,  therefore,  and  do  them :  for 
this  is  your  wisdom  and  your  understanding  in  the 
sight  of  the  nations,  which  shall  hear  all  these  statutes, 
and  say,  'Surely  this  great  nation  is  a  wise  and  under- 
standing people'."  A  first  reading  of  this  passage 
might  very  easily  leave  the  impression  on  the  mind 


84  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

that  the  writer  in  the  latter  part  of  the  passage  had 
abbreviated  the  expression,  "statutes  and  judgments," 
used  in  the  first  part  of  the  passage,  to  the  word 
"statutes,"  and  had  used  this  word  in  a  general  de- 
scriptive way  covering  both  kinds  of  laws.  Here,  also, 
it  seems  to  me  there  is  rather  a  nice  discrimination  in 
the  use  of  these  technical  terms  than  any  exception  to 
their  technical  use.  The  "nations"  would  not  wonder 
at  the  "judgments"  of  Israel,  because  those  "judg- 
ments" were  almost  entirely  "common  law,"  well- 
knovm  decisions  of  judges,  for  the  most  part  readily 
recognizable  upon  common  principles  of  justice  and 
equity  in  accordance  with  the  moral  intuitions.  Not 
so  the  "statutes";  those  were  regulations  about  un- 
familiar things,  or  new  and  remarkable  regulations 
about  things  which  may  have  been  already  familiar 
before  the  "statute."  It  was  the  wonderful  ceremonial 
system  and  the  directions  for  the  symbolical  Taber- 
nacle, embodying  as  they  did  Israel's  religion,  which 
distinguished  this  people  above  all  others  in  the  world. 
The  Israelites  were  directed  to  keep  both  "judgments" 
and  "statutes,"  but  it  was  the  keeping  of  these  "stat- 
utes" about  which  the  "nations"  would  express  such 
amazement. 

In  Deut.  VII:11-13  it  is  said:  "Thou  shalt  therefore 
keep  the  commandments,  and  the  statutes,  and  the 
judgments,  which  I  command  thee  this  day,  to  do  them : 
wherefore  it  shall  come  to  pass  if  ye  hearken  to  these 
judgments,  and  keep,  and  do  them,  that  the  Lord  thy 
God  shall  keep  unto  thee  the  covenant  and  the  mercy 
which  he  sware  unto  thy  fathers,  etc."  Here,  again, 
a  first  hasty  reading  of  the  passage  is  almost  certain 
to  leave  the  impression  on  the  mind  that  the  word 
"judgments"  is  used  in  the  latter  part  of  the  passage 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  85 

as  a  term  to  denote  all  the  three  kinds  of  laws,  "com- 
mandments," "statutes"  and  "judgments,"  mentioned 
in  the  former  part  of  the  passage.    It  may  be  so ;  but 
it  does  not  seem  to  me  to  be  so  upon  careful  considera- 
tion of  the  sense  of  the  whole  paragraph.     The  Lord 
here  gives  the  ground  upon  which  he  will  keep  his  part 
of  the  covenant  of  works.    But  the  covenant  of  works 
rested  upon  the  doing  of  righteousness  by  those  under 
the  covenant:  the  doing  of  righteousness  was  formu- 
lated in  the  Commandments,  but  the  practical  embodi- 
ment of  these  for  the  obedience  of  the  people  was  in 
the  "judgments."    The  doing  of  righteousness  was  not 
at  all  in  the  keeping  of  the  ritual  regulations,  "stat- 
utes" ;  "Obedience  is  better  than  sacrifice."    God  never 
said  to  the  Israelites,  "Follow  the  ceremonial  regula- 
tions," "statutes,"  "and  I  will  keep  my  covenant  with 
you."     So  this  instance  of  the  use  of  the  word  "judg- 
ments" also  seems  to  me,  not  only  not  an  exceptional, 
but  a  discriminatingly  exact,  use  of  this  technical  term. 
The  results  of  this  first  investigation  may  now  be 
tabulated  below.    There  are  three  very  distinct  KINDS 
of  laws  in  the  Pentateuch.     These  laws  of  different 
KINDS  are  given  in  many  different  lists,  a  few  long, 
and  many  very  short.    The  lists  of  the  various  KINDS 
of  laws  are  not  always  denominated,  but  are  often  so, 
and,  where  so  denominated,  certain  titles  "command- 
ments," "judgments,"  "statutes,"  are  used  as  technical 
legal  terms  denoting  by  their  significance  distinct,  and 
clearly  differentiated,  classes  of  laws.     These  titles, 
wherever  they  occur  are  used  with  accuracy  and  nice 
discrimination;  "judgments"  and  "statutes"  with  un- 
varying technicality.    The  word  "commandments"  has, 
also,  a  very  extensive  descriptive  use  in  the  lists  of 
laws  so  that  its  technical  use  is  not  always  immediately 


86  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

manifest,  but  clearly  appears  upon  careful  examina- 
tion. The  connection  between  the  lists  of  laws  and 
the  narrative  portions  is  not  always  indicated,  except 
by  the  position  which  a  list  occupies,  but  in  many  cases 
it  is  distinctly  apparent  and  in  some  instances  the  par- 
ticular incident  which  called  forth  the  law  or  list  of 
laws  stands  out  distinctly. 

It  will  now  be  in  order  to  point  out  all  the  lists  of 
these  various  KINDS  of  laws  which  have  no  title  given 
within  the  list,  but  whose  classification  is  clearly  dis- 
cernible now  that  the  character  of  each  kind  of  laws  is 
exactly  determined. 

7.     Lists  of  Laws  without  Title: 

JUDGMENTS 

Ex.  XXIII  :31-33. 

Lev.  XIX:5-10. 

Lev.  XIX:11-18. 

Lev.  XIX:29-36. 

Lev.  XXIV:  10-22. 

Deut.  1:18.     Cf.  Ex.  XXI:1-XXIII:19. 

Deut.  XXII:3-10. 

Deut.  XXII:  12-30. 

Deut.  XXIII  :4. 

STATUTES 

Ex.  XX:24-26. 

Ex.  XXV:1-XXVII:19. 

Ex.  XXX:1-16. 

Ex.  XXX:22-38. 

Ex.  XXXIV  :18-26. 

Lev.  1:3-17. 

Lev.  11:1-3. 

Lev.  11:4-16. 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  87 

Lev.  IV:1-12. 

Lev.  IV:  13-21. 

Lev.  IV:22-26. 

Lev.  IV:27-35. 

Lev.  V:l-19. 

Lev.  VI:1-15. 

Lev.  VI:24-30. 

Lev.  VII:  1-27. 

Lev.  XII:  1-8. 

Lev.  XIII:l-46. 

Lev.  XIII:47-59. 

Lev.  XIV:  1-32. 

Lev.  XIV:33-57. 

Lev.  XV:l-33. 

Lev.  XVI:  1-28. 

Lev.  XVII:10-16. 

Num.  XV:17-XVIII:7. 

Num.  XXVII  :15-XXIX:40. 

Num.  XXXI:21-54. 

Deut.  XXIII  :l-8. 

Deut.  XXIII  :10-14. 

Deut.  XXVI:  1-15. 

STATUTES  OF  JUDGMENT 

Num.  XXXV:30-34. 

Num.  XXXVI  :1-12.  Cf.  XXVII  rlL 

Deut.  XX:  1-20. 

Deut.  XXI:10-23. 

Deut.  XXIII  :15-16. 

STATUTES  AND  JUDGMENT 

Ex.  XXXIV  :18-20. 

8.     Complete,  classified  catalogue  of  lists  of  Laws 
with  or  without  titles: 


88  TKE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

COMMANDMENTS 

Ex.  XX:  1-17;  title,  XX:  17. 

Deut.  XXVII  :l-8;  title,  XXVII  :1. 

COMMANDMENTS   AND   STATUTES 

Deut.  XXVII  :  1  -  XXVIII  :  68 ;    title,    XXVII  :  10, 

XXVIII  :15  and  45. 
Deut.  XXIX:1-XXX:14;  title,  XXX  :10. 

JUDGMENTS 

Ex.  XV:25;  title,  25. 

Ex.  XXI:1-XXIII:19;  title,  XXI  :1. 

Ex.  XXIII  :31-33. 

Lev.  XIX:5-10. 

Lev.  XIX:11-18. 

Lev.  XIX:29-36. 

Lev.  XXIV:  10-22. 

Num.  XXXV:9-24;  title,  XXXV  :24.  Cf.  XXXV  :12. 

Deut.  1:18,  summing  up  Ex.  XXI:1-XXIII:19. 

Deut.  XXII:3-10. 

Deut.  XXII:  12-30. 

Deut.  XXIII  :9. 

Deut.  XXIII  :17-XXV:19. 

STATUTES 

Ex.  XII  :14,  17,  24  and  43. 

Ex.  XIII  :10. 

Ex.  XV:25-26. 

Ex.  XVIII  :16  and  20. 

Ex.  XX:24-26. 

Ex.  XXV:1-XXVII:19.     Directions  for  procedure, 

unmistakably  "statutes." 
Ex.  XXVII  :20-21;  title,  XXVII  :21. 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  89 

Ex.  XXVIII  :l-43;  title,  XXVIII  :43. 

Ex.  XXIX:  1-46;  title,  XXIX  :9  and  28. 

Ex.  XXX:1-16. 

Ex.  XXX:22-38. 

Ex.  XXX:l-38;  title,  XXX  :21.  The  remainder  of 
the  laws  in  this  list  are  clearly  of  the  same 
character. 

Ex.  XXX:17-21;  title,  XXX  :21. 

Lev.  1:3-17. 

Lev.  11:1-3. 

Lev.  11:4-16. 

Lev.  111:1-17;  title,  111:17. 

Lev.  IV:  1-12. 

Lev.  IV:  13-21. 

Lev.  IV:22-26. 

Lev.  IV:27-35. 

Lev.  V:l-19. 

Lev.  VI:  1-13. 

Lev.  VI:14-23;  title,  VI:18   (Heb.  11). 

Lev.  VI:24-30. 

Lev.  VII:  1-27. 

Lev.  VII  :28-34 ;  title,  VII  :34. 

Lev.  VII:35-36;  title,  VII  :36. 

Lev.  X:8-ll;  title,  X:9,  also  11,  but  this  last  with- 
out list  of  laws. 

Lev.  X:12-15;  title,  X:  15. 

Lev.  XII:l-8. 

Lev.  XIII:  1-46. 

Lev.  XIII:47-59. 

Lev.  XIV:  1-32. 

Lev.  XIV:33-57. 

Lev.  XV:  1-35. 

Lev.  XVI:  1-28. 

Lev.  XVI:29-34;  title,  XVI  :29  and  34. 


90  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

Lev.  XVII:  1-9;  title,  XVII  :7. 

Lev.  XVII:  10-16. 

Lev.  XIX:19-28;  title,  XIX  :18. 

Lev.  XXIII  :l-44;  title,  XXIII  :14,  21  and  41. 

Lev.  XXIV :  1-4;  title,  XXIV  :3. 

Lev.  XXIV  :5-9;  title,  XXIV  :9. 

Num.  I-X  :36  title  to  some  of  the  lists  IX  :12  and  14, 
X:8.  The  other  lists  are  plainly  of  the  same 
character. 

Num.  XV:1-31;  title,  XV:15. 

Num.  XVIII  :8-19;  title,  XVIII  :8,  11  and  19. 

Num.  XVIII  :20-32;  title,  XVIII  :23. 

Num.  XIX:  1-10;  title,  XIX  :2  and  10. 

Num.  XIX:ll-22;  title,  XIX  :21. 

Num.  XXVII  :15-XXIX:40. 

Num.  XXX:1-16;  title,  XXX  :16. 

Num.  XXXI:21-54. 

Num.  XXXIV:  1-17.  Statutory  directions,  but  with- 
out title  in  this  passage. 

Num.  XXXV:  1-8. 

Deut.  XVII:14-20;  title,  XVII  :19. 

Deut.  XXIII:  1-8. 

Deut.  XXIII  :10-14. 

Deut.  XXVI:  1-15. 

STATUTES   AND   JUDGMENTS 

Ex.  XXXIV  :18-26;  18  "judgment,"  19-20  "stat- 
utes," 21  "judgment,"  22-26  "statutes." 

Lev.  XVIII:  1-30;  title,  XVIII  :4-5  and  26;  1-17 
"statutes,"  18-26  "judgments,"  27-30  narrative. 

Lev.  XIX:l-37;  title,  XIX  :36,  with  the  sub-title, 
"statutes,"  XIX:  19,  for  a  list  of  "statutes"  oc- 
curring within  this  list  of  "judgments"  and 
"statutes":   1-4   "judgments,"   5-10  "statutes," 


FIRST  INVESTIGATION  91 

11-18  "judgments,"  19-28  "statutes"  (20  a 
"statute  of  judgment"),  29-36  "judgments." 

Lev.  XX:l-27;  title,  XX:22;  1-8  "statutes,"  9-16 
"judgments,"  17-26  "statutes,"  27  "judgment." 
Cf.  note  p.  49. 

Lev.  XXI:1-XXV:55;  title,  XXV  :18;  with  the  sub- 
title "statutes"  for  a  brief  list  of  "statutes," 
Lev.  XXIV  :l-4;  XXI-XXIV:16  "statutes," 
XXIV:17-23  "judgments,"  XXV:l-35  "stat- 
utes," XXV:36-55  "judgments." 

Lev.  XXVI:l-46;  title,  XXVI  :3  and  15;  XXVI  :l-2 
"judgments,"  XXVI:3-46  "statutes." 

Deut.  IV:l-24;  title,  IV:14.  Cf.  IV  :1,  4-5,  40  and 
45. 

COMMANDMENTS,  STATUTES  AND  JUDGMENTS 

Lev.  XVII:1-XXVI:46;  title,  XXVI  :46. 

Lev.  XXVI:l-46;  title,  3,  15  and  46. 

Deut.  V:1-XXVI:19;  title,  V:l-2,  V:31,  VI  :1,  VI: 
17.  Cf .  VI  :20,  24  and  note  in  detailed  comment 
(p.  64),  VI:25,  VII  :11,  Cf.  VII  :12,  note  in 
comment  (p.  65),  VIII  :11,  XI  :1.  Cf.  X:13  and 
note  in  comment  (p.  65-66),  and  XXVI  :17. 

Deut.  XXX:15-20;  title,  XXX  :16. 

COMMANDMENTS  AND  JUDGMENTS 

Num.  XXII:1-XXXVI:13;  title,  XXXVI  :13,  in- 
cluding some  sub-titles,  also  Cf.  detailed  com- 
ment (p.  57-61). 

COMMANDMENTS   AND   STATUTES 

Deut.  IV:25-40;  title,  IV:40. 

Deut.  XXVII  :1-XXVIII:68:    title,    XXVII  :10,    Cf. 


92  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

XXVII  :1  and  XXVIII  :15  and  45. 
Deut.  XXIX:1-XXX:14;  title,  XXX  :10. 

STATUTES  OF  JUDGMENT 

Lev.  XXV:l-55;  title,  XXV  :18. 
Num.  XXVII  :1-11;  title,  XXVII  :11. 
Num.  XXXV:25-29;  title,  XXXV  :29. 
Num.  XXXV:30-34. 
Num.  XXXVI  :1-12,  Cf.  XXVII  :11. 
Deut.  XX:  1-20. 
Deut.  XXI:10-23. 
Deut.  XXIII  :15-16. 

STATUTES,    JUDGMENTS   AND  LAWS 

Lev.  XVII  :2-XXVI  :46 ;    title,    XXVI  :46    (perhaps 
Lev.  I-XXVI:46). 


Chapter  II 

SECOND    INVESTIGATION 

Different  LITERARY  FORMS  for  Different  USES 

OF  the  Various  KINDS  of  Laws  Discovered 

A  second  subject  for  investigation  arises  at  once, 
when  the  various  KINDS  of  laws  have  been  noted  and 
all  the  lists  of  each  kind  collected  together :  this  second 
investigation  concerns  the  LITERARY  FORM  in 
which  these  different  KINDS  of  laws  are  cast.  Are 
all  the  KINDS  of  laws  expressed  in  the  same  manner? 
or  does  each  KIND  of  laws  appear  in  a  different 
LITERARY  FORM? 

This  literary  enquiry  from  the  standpoint  of  the 
various  KINDS  of  laws  has  already  been  the  subject 
of  investigation  by  another;  and  in  part,  observed,  or, 
at  least,  suggested  as  a  fruitful  source  of  study,  by 
many  others.  In  1904,  Harold  M.  Wiener,  Esq.,  of 
London,  published  a  small  volume  of  "Studies  in  Bibli- 
cal Law"  in  which  are  brought  to  light  some  facts  bear- 
ing upon  the  different  LITERARY  FORMS  in  which 
various  KINDS  of  laws  were  expressed  in  the  Penta- 
teuch. In  April,  1907,  the  same  author  published  in 
the  Princeton  Review  an  article  in  which  three  distinct 
LITERARY  FORMS  in  the  expression  of  laws  in  the 
Pentateuch  were  pointed  out.  The  same  facts  and 
opinions  were  republished  by  Mr.  Wiener  in  his 
volume  of  "Pentateuchal  Studies,"  1912,  pp.  170-194. 

I  acknowledge  my  indebtedness  to  Mr.  Wiener  for 
the  fundamental  facts  which  he  brought  out  so  clearly, 

93 


94  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

and,  in  part,  for  the  nomenclature  which  I  have  adopted 
in  the  investigation  now  to  follow.  For  the  use  which 
I  make  of  the  facts  and  for  the  conclusions  reached,  I 
am  myself  wholly  responsible. 

The  following  LITERARY  FORMS  are  easily  and 
clearly  distinguishable  in  the  groups  of  "command- 
ments," "judgments"  and  "statutes"  which  were  dis- 
covered in  the  preceding  investigations: 

I.  MNEMONIC 

1.  Portions  of  the  laws  in  the  Pentateuch  are  ex- 
pressed in  a  very  brief,  terse  manner.  The  sentences 
are  composed  almost  entirely  of  verbs  and  nouns  with 
only  the  addition  of  the  necessary  enclitics ;  rarely  is 
a  descriptive  word  or  phrase  introduced.  There  very 
rarely  appear  either  adjectives  or  adverbs.  Thus  no 
explanations  or  characterizations  are  given.  These 
are  the  usual  literary  characteristics  of  the  statement 
of  things. long  familiar  to  both  writer  and  reader,  and 
of  the  discussion  of  subjects  which  are  precisely  de- 
limited. These  characteristics  are  equally  observable 
in  most  of  the  laws  of  the  Code  of  Khammurabi,  which 
is  universally  regarded,  not  as  an  enactment  of  laws, 
but  as  the  codification  and  promulgation,  with  a  new 
authority,  of  laws  which  were  the  result  of  a  long 
period  of  the  decisions  of  judges.  The  Ten  Command- 
ments, with  the  exception  of  those  for  which  the  people 
needed  special  exhortation,  the  second  and  the  fourth 
Commandments,  are  distinctly  in  this  literary  form. 
The  "judgments,"  also,  generally,  with  some  few  dis- 
tinct exceptions  which  will  presently  be  fully  noted, 
manifest  these  same  characteristics. 

A  poetic  tendency  is,  also,  frequently  to  be  observed 
in  this  Mnemonic  LITERARY  FORM  in  certain  of  the 


SECOND  INVESTIGATION  95 

Pentateuchal  laws ;  indeed,  it  can  scarcely  be  ignored. 
There  is  to  be  found  a  balancing  of  clauses  similar  to 
the  parallelism  of  Hebrew  Poetry.  Something  of  a 
rhythmic  character  is  given  to  a  law  so  expressed. 

2.  All  these  characteristics  will  best  be  brought  to 
our  notice  by  observing  a  number  of  examples.  They 
are  so  strikingly  distinct,  that  they  ofttimes  appear 
almost  as  clearly  in  the  English  as  in  the  Hebrew. 
The  "Commandments"  are  so  familiar  that  it  is  un- 
necessary to  print  them  here.  Two  of  the  first  four 
Commandments,  i.e.  of  the  first  table  of  the  law, 
present  such  fundamental  principles  of  morals  as 
needed,  in  that  age,  special  emphasis :  the  Second  con- 
cerning the  use  of  adolatrous  images  and  the  Fourth 
concerning  the  Sabbath  and  its  relation  to  the  re- 
mainder of  the  week,  i.e.  concerning  secular  work  for 
six  days  of  the  week  and  Sabbath  rest  for  the  Seventh 
day.  Accordingly,  these  two  Commandments  are  long 
and  very  explicit  in  their  enunciation  of  all  the  de- 
tails involved  in  the  Commandment,  exactly  as  was 
true  of  the  unfamiliar  laws  among  the  "judgments," 
e.g.  new  legislation  in  matters  "one  with  another." 
The  other  six  Commandments  are  expressed  in  ex- 
ceedingly brief,  terse  manner.  It  is  believed  by  some 
that  the  Commandments  were,  for  the  most  part,  at 
least,  originally  expressed  in  a  single  Hebrew  word, 
hence  the  title  sometimes  given  the  Ten  Command- 
ments, the  Ten  Words. 

Some  citations  from  the  "judgments"  will  serve  to 
illustrate  the  various  LITERARY  FORMS  and,  also, 
the  peculiarities  already  mentioned.  Note  first,  as 
illustration,  two  passages  of  Hebrew  poetry: 

Prov.  XX:  10-14: 

"Divers  weights  and  divers  measures. 


96  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

Both  of  them  alike  are  an  abomination  to  the 
Lord. 

Even   a  child  maketh  himself  known   by  his 

doings, 
Whether  his  work  be  pure  and  whether  it  be 

right. 

The  hearing  ear  and  the  seeing  eye, 
The  Lord  hath  made  even  both  of  them. 

Love  not  sleep  lest  thou  come  to  poverty: 
Open  thine  eyes,  and  thou  shalt  be  satisfied  with 
bread. 

It  is  naught,  it  is  naught,  saith  the  buyer : 
But  when  he  is  gone  his  way,  then  he  boasteth." 

Job.  XIII:9-15: 

"Is  it  good  that  he  should  search  you  out? 

Or  as  one  deceiveth  a  man,  will  ye  deceive  him? 

He  will  surely  reprove  you, 

If  you  do  secretly  respect  persons. 

Shall  not  his  excellency  make  you  afraid  ? 
And  his  dread  fall  upon  you? 

Your  memorable  sayings  are  proverbs  of  ashes, 
Your  defenses  are  defenses  of  clay. 

Hold  your  peace,  let  me  alone  that  I  may  speak, 
And  let  come  on  me  what  will. 


SECOND  INVESTIGATION  97 

Wherefore  should  I  take  my  flesh  in  my  teeth? 
And  put  my  life  in  mine  hand? 

Though  he  slay  me,  yet  will  I  wait  for  him. 
Nevertheless,  I  will  maintain  my  ways  before 
him." 

With  this  poetry  now  compare  in  style  some  pas- 
sages from  the  "Judgments"  in  the  Pentateuch : 

Ex.  XXI:12-17: 

"He  that  smiteth  a  man,  so  that  he  die, 
Shall  be  surely  put  to  death. 

And  if  a  man  lie  not  in  wait,  but  God  deliver  him 

unto  his  hand, 
Then  I  will  appoint  thee  a  place  whither  he  shall 

flee. 

But  if  a  man  come  presumptuously  upon  his 
neighbor  to  slay  him  with  guile; 

Thou  Shalt  take  him  from  mine  altar,  that  he 
may  die. 

And  he  that  smiteth  his  father,  or  his  mother. 
Shall  be  surely  put  to  death. 

And  he  that  stealeth  a  man,  and  selleth  him,  or 

if  he  be  found  in  his  hand, 
He  shall  surely  be  put  to  death. 

And  he  that  curseth  his  father,  or  his  mother, 
Shall  surely  be  put  to  death." 


98  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

Lev.  XXIV:  17-21: 

"And  he  that  killeth  any  man, 
Shall  surely  be  put  to  death. 

And  he  that  killeth  a  beast, 

Shall  make  it  good :  beast  for  beast. 

And  if  a  man  cause  a  blemish  in  his  neighbor : 
As  he  hath  done,  so  shall  it  be  done  to  him. 

Breach  for  breach,  eye  for  eye,  tooth  for  tooth : 
As  he  hath  caused  a  blemish  in  a  man,  so  shall 
it  be  done  to  him  again. 

And  he  that  killeth  a  beast,  he  shall  restore  it : 
And  he  that  killeth  a  man,  he  shall  be  put  to 
death." 
The  rhythmic  character  of  these  "judgments"  closely 
approaching  the  rhythm  of  poetry,  is  apparent  on  the 
most  casual  reading.  The  sententiousness  of  the  laws 
is  equally  apparent.  The  lack  of  descriptive  words  is 
seen  upon  a  very  little  examination.  In  Ex.  XXI :  12- 
17,  there  is  not  an  adjective  in  the  whole  passage  nor 
is  there  an  adverb,  except  enclitics  sometimes  called 
model  adverbs;  of  the  descriptive  adverbs,  not  one. 
The  adverbs,  "sure"  and  "surely"  and  "presumptuous- 
ly" which  appear  in  the  English  are  not  in  the  Hebrew 
explicitly,  but  are  implied  in  the  Hebrew  verbs,  or  by 
a  repetition  of  the  verb.  In  the  second  passage,  Lev. 
XXIV:17-21,  there  is  practically  the  same  utter  ab- 
sence of  descriptive  words.  There  is  not  a  single  ad- 
jective, and  no  adverbs  except  the  correlative  adverb 
ken,  "so,"  answering  to  the  relative  ka'sher  "according 


SECOND  INVESTIGATION  99 

Not  every  list  of  "judgments"  affords  such  perfect 
illlustration  of  the  distinguishing  characteristics  of 
the  style  of  the  "judgments."  But  the  same  character- 
istics are  to  be  found  in  some  measure  in  nearly  every 
"judgment,"  particularly  the  more  common  "judg- 
ments." 

Another  passage  will  illustrate  a  somewhat  different 
manifestation  of  these  characteristics : 

Num.  XXV:  17-21: 

"And  if  he  smite  him  with  throwing  a  stone, 
wherewith  he  may  die,  and  he  die,  he  is  a 
murderer: 

The  murderer  shall  surely  be  put  to  death. 

The  revenger  of  blood  himself  shall  slay  the 

murderer : 
When  he  meeteth  him,  he  shall  slay  him. 

But  if  he  thrust  him  of  hatred,  or  hurl  at  him  by 

laying  of  wait,  that  he  die ; 
Or  in  enmity  smite  him  with  his  hand  that  he 

die; 
Ke  that  smote  him  shall  surely  be  put  to  death ; 

for  he  is  a  murderer : 
The  revenger  of  blood  shall  slay  the  murderer, 

when  he  meeteth  him." 

In  this  passage  the  rhythmic  character  is  not  so 
marked,  yet  it  is  far  from  the  ordinary  prose  form, 
and  description  is  almost  as  absolutely  wanting  as  in 
the  other  passages  quoted.  There  are  no  adjectives  and 
no  adverbs. 

Some  "judgments,"  as  already  intimated,  are  less 
sententious  and  more  descriptive.  Especially  is  this 
true  of  the  less  known  "judgments,"  i.e.  "judgments" 


100  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

concerning  less  common  and  familiar  matters.  The 
law  of  usury  which  made  special  restrictions  in  the 
loaning  of  money  in  the  wilderness,  where  loans  would 
be  wholly  for  the  relief  of  poverty,  and  for  the  promised 
land  into  which  it  was  then  expected  that  they  would 
at  once  enter,  where  each  man  would  have  his  own 
piece  of  land  in  severalty,  and  there  would  be  little  or 
no  opportunity,  or,  at  least  urgent  occasion,  for  com- 
mercial loans,  but  only  for  the  relief  of  the  poor.  Such 
usury  laws  were  special  laws  of  "matters  one  with 
another,"  not  familiar  and  well  understood  laws,  and 
naturally  they  are  found  to  be  less  sententious  and 
more  descriptive. 

Ex.  XXII:25-27  (Heb.  XXII:24-26)  :  "If  thou  lend 
money  to  any  of  my  people  that  is  poor  by  thee,  thou 
shalt  not  be  to  him  as  an  usurer,  neither  shalt  thou 
lay  upon  him  usury.  If  thou  at  all  take  thy  neighbor's 
raiment  to  pledge,  thou  shalt  deliver  it  to  him  by  that 
the  sun  goeth  down :  for  that  is  his  covering  only,  it  is 
his  raiment  for  his  skin :  wherein  shall  he  sleep  ?  and 
it  shall  come  to  pass  when  he  crieth  unto  me,  that  I  will 
hear ;  for  I  am  gracious." 

Not  only  are  these  laws  for  the  mitigation  of  hard- 
ships which  were  common  among  the  people  less  sen- 
tentious, but  there  are,  also  descriptive  words  intro- 
duced, adjectives,  as  "poor"  and  "gracious." 

Some  descriptive  characteristics  are  to  be  seen  in 
the  law  to  mitigate  slavery,  Ex.  XXI:  1-6;  and  especi- 
ally in  the  "statutes  of  judgment."  These  were  neces- 
sarily new  legislation,  being  "statutes,"  i.e.  special 
legislative  directions  to  mitigate  the  harshness  of  well 
known  "judgments,"  or  special  legislation  to  provide 
for  cases  not  met  by  known  "judgments."  Such  was 
the  law  concerning  the  inheritance  of  Zelophehad's 


SECOND  INVESTIGATION  101 

daughters,  Num.  XXVII  :1-11.  Cf.  also,  the  special 
legislation  concerning  the  Cities  of  Refuge,  a  "statute 
of  judgment,"  Num.  XXXV:l-34.  This  peculiarity  of 
the  less  familiar  legislation  is  still  more  especially 
marked  by  the  contrast  afforded  by  the  appearance  in 
this  account  of  the  Cities  of  Refuge  of  some  common 
"judgments"  on  murder  which  are  sententious,  in 
sharp  contrast  with  the  descriptive  character  of  the 
special  legislation  concerning  the  Cities  of  Refuge. 
Verses  26-31  of  the  account  of  the  Cities  of  Refuge  will 
illustrate  this  contrast: 

"But  if  the  slayer  shall  at  any  time  come  without  the 
border  of  his  city  of  refuge,  whither  he  was  fled ;  and 
the  revenger  of  blood  find  him  without  the  borders  of 
the  city  of  his  refuge,  and  the  revenger  of  blood  kill 
the  slayer :  he  shall  not  be  guilty  of  blood :  because  he 
should  have  remained  in  the  city  of  his  refuge  until  the 
death  of  the  high  priest:  but  after  the  death  of  the 
high  priest  the  slayer  shall  return  unto  the  land  of  his 
possession.  So  these  things  shall  be  for  a  statute  of 
judgment  unto  you  throughout  your  generations  in  all 
your  dwellings. 

Whoso  killeth  any  person  the  murderer  shall 

be  put  to  death,  by  the  mouth  of  witnesses : 
But  one  witness  shall  not  testify  against  any 

person  to  cause  him  to  die. 

Moreover  ye  shall  take  no  satisfaction  for  the 

life  of  a  murderer  which  is  guilty  of  death: 

He  shall  be  surely  put  to  death." 

Two  things  suggest  the  name  "mnemonic"  for  this 

class  of  laws  just  considered,  most  of  which  appear  in 

this  sententious  LITERARY  FORM.  In  the  first  place, 

the  character  and  use  of  the  laws  suggest  it  and  lead 

us  to  suspect  that  they  would  be  in  a  form  suitable  for 


102  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

memorizing.  Everybody  in  Israel  needed  to  mem- 
orize the  Ten  Commandments.  What  child  of  parents 
holding  to  the  Bible  anywhere  in  the  world,  at  any 
time  in  the  history  of  the  world,  has  not  been  taught 
to  memorize  these  Commandments?  The  "judgments," 
also,  needed  to  be  memorized  by  the  judges  appointed 
in  Israel,  just  as  a  modern  magistrate,  especially  in  the 
great  centers  of  population,  needs  to  be  very  familiar 
with  certain  common  laws  in  order  to  hear  ordinary 
causes  of  men,  "one  with  another,"  and  render  a  deci- 
sion at  once  without  adjourning  the  case  for  delibera- 
tion, or  even  turning  to  refer  to  written  laws. 

These  "judgments"  being  for  the  most  part  "judg- 
ings,"  decisions  of  judges,  undoubtedly  existed  as  com- 
mon law  and  passed  from  mouth  to  mouth,  perhaps  for 
centuries,  before  they  were  written  down  at  all  and 
most  probably,  for  Israel,  never  witten  down  until  the 
authoritative  selection  of  them  was  made  by  Moses 
under  the  direction  of  the  Lord  and  they  were  promul- 
gated as  a  divinely  authorized  Code  in  the  Pentateuch. 
Such  laws  handed  down  in  this  fashion  and  constantly 
used  in  decisions  of  magistrates  would  naturally  tend 
toward  sententiousness  and  rhythm.  We  ought  to  ex- 
pect to  find  them  in  exactly  this  form  suitable  for 
memorizing.  Indeed,  is  it  not  universally  true,  that 
whatever  is  handed  down  orally  for  a  long  time  tends 
always  toward  a  poetic  form,  a  kind  of  minstrelsy. 
Witness  the  great  store  of  folk-lore  of  Europe,  es- 
pecially that  of  Medieval  Europe,  which  gave  birth  to 
the  minstrelsy  of  the  troubadours.  The  same  tendency 
even  more  strongly  marked  may  be  noted  in  the  roman- 
tic tales  of  the  eastern  desert,  and  may  even  be  heard, 
as  I  have  heard  it,  in  the  half-poetic  descanting  of  the 
Mohammedan  annotator  on  the  Koran.    The  nursery 


SECOND  INVESTIGATION  103 

rhymes  of  our  childhood  have  come  into  their  present 
familiar  form  in  the  same  way.  If  it  seem  that  such 
serious  and  dignified  persons  as  judges  would  never 
descend  to  such  literary  methods  in  law,  we  have  only 
to  call  to  mind  the  poetic  form  of  the  Roman  Twelve 
Tables  to  have  before  us  an  exact  parallel  to  the  senten- 
tious and  rhythmic  style  of  the  "judgments"  in  the 
Books  of  the  Law. 

Again,  the  designation  of  this  class  of  laws,  found 
in  such  LITERARY  FORM,  as  "mnemonic"  is  justified 
fully  by  the  literary  form  itself,  with  its  tendency 
toward  poetry.  The  name  is  exactly  appropriate  to 
the  form  which  the  use  of  these  laws  has  given  them. 
It  has  long  been  a  custom  to  arrange  geographical 
facts,  grammatical  facts,  and  even  mathematical  facts 
in  this  form  for  use  in  primary  schools,  and  wherever 
such  forms  are  found  it  is  at  once  apparent  that  they 
were  intended  for  convenience  in  memorizing.  Such 
was  the  manifest  intent  of  the  horn  tables  of  Medieval 
times,  and  the  geographical  rhymes  by  which  many 
still  living  learned  the  political  divisions  of  the  modern 
world.  Perhaps  it  is  because  these  rhymes  have  been 
laid  aside  that  the  present  generation  is  so  lamentably 
deficient  in  the  knowledge  of  political  Geography.  So 
why  should  any  one  write  laws  in  poetry  or  in  any- 
thing approaching  poetic  form,  except  for  convenience 
in  memorizing?  Thus  this  whole  class  of  laws  may  be 
appropriately  called  "mnemonic,"  though  there  be  a 
few  exceptions  in  the  case  of  legislation  on  unfamiliar 
subjects,  or  new  legislation  on  familiar  subjects.  Had 
not  this  new  legislation  been  at  once  written  down  it 
would  doubtless,  also,  by  the  attrition  of  time  and  oral 
teaching,  have  been  worn  down  into  the  mnemonic 
form. 


104  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

II.  DESCRIPTIVE 

1.  If  "judgments"  were  common  law,  usually  about 
familiar  things,  and  so  properly  expressed  tersely  and 
with  few  or  no  descriptive  words  or  phrases,  then  we 
would  certainly  expect  laws  about  unfamiliar  things 
not  to  be  so  expressed,  but  to  need  many  descriptive 
words  and  phrases,  and  so  to  be  written  in  a  DE- 
SCRIPTIVE style.  Without  such  explanatory  words 
and  phrases,  laws  about  unfamiliar  things  would  not 
be  intelligible  to  the  people. 

Now,  there  were  just  such  unfamiliar  subjects  of 
legislation  among  the  laws  of  the  Pentateuch.  Such, 
for  example,  were,  in  some  respects,  if  not  in  all  re- 
spects, most  of  the  laws  of  the  Ceremonial  system. 
One  of  the  fundamental  principles  of  modern  literary 
criticism  is  that  great  systems  of  laws  are  a  growth. 
This  is  a  sound  principle  which,  moreover,  does  not 
militate  against  the  doctrine  of  a  divine  objective 
revelation,  as  some  critics  believe  and  wish,  and  other 
critics  believe  and  fear;  for  there  might  be  added  to 
this  fundamental  principle  another  still  more  funda- 
mental, one  founded  in  the  very  nature  of  God,  that 
God  could  not  have  created  or  revealed  anything  al- 
ready known  and  at  hand.  Nor  can  we  think  of  God 
doing  such  a  thing,  if  it  were  possible :  Divinity  never 
wastes  anything.  Christ  revealed  the  significance  of 
the  Supper,  but  he  used  the  bread  and  the  wine  ready 
at  hand,  as  the  Governor  of  the  universe  "set"  or 
established  the  symbolical  covenant  significance  of  the 
bow  in  the  cloud,  but  he  used  the  rainbow  already 
potentially  existing  at  all  times  in  the  laws  of  the 
universe  governing  the  refraction  of  light.  And  the 
Creator  at  the  beginning  "created  man  a  living  soul" 
and  breathed  into  him  the  "breath  of  life,"  but  used 


SECOND  INVESTIGATION  105 

the  "dust  of  the  earth,"  the  natural  material  elements, 
for  his  body.  So  while  he  breathed  into  the  Cere- 
monial System  the  "breath  of  life,"  when  he  gave  such 
directions  about  its  employment  at  Sinai  as  made  it  a 
symbolical  vehicle  of  the  revelation  of  a  Redeemer  to 
come,  he  used  ritual  which  was  itself  the  growth  of 
centuries,  or  millenniums,  (Cf.  International  Stand- 
ard Bible  Encyclopaedia  26-38). 

Professor  Langdon  sitting  in  his  study  in  the 
museum  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania  said  to  me 
in  an  interview  for  the  Sunday  School  Times,  as  he 
swept  his  hand  around  the  shelves  which  lined  the 
walls,  "These  tablets  from  the  Nippur  Library  are 
filled  with  the  ritual  and  theology  of  the  Ancient 
Sumerians."  Professor  Langdon  sets  forth  as  the  re- 
sult of  his  examination  of  a  large  portion  of  these 
tablets  this  startling  discovery  that  the  Sumerians  had 
all  the  ritual  that  has  ever  been  known  in  the  world 
from  that  day  to  this.  This  ritual  is  all  in  these 
Sumerian  tablets.  Whether  the  Sumerians  developed 
this  ritual  themselves  or  in  turn  received  it  from  the 
people  who  went  before  them  does  not  appear.  It  is 
certain  that  the  Egyptians,  from  among  whom  the 
Israelites  had  just  come,  had  a  very  elaborate  ritual 
long  after  the  Sumerian  days;  offerings,  vestments, 
libations,  incense,  "fine  twined  linen,"  jeweled  breast- 
plates, choirs  of  singers,  platoons  of  attendants  such 
as  were  the  Levites,  sprinklings  and  genuflections, 
overshadowing  wings,  and  veiled  faces,  every  act  and 
all  the  materials  that  go  to  make  up  the  forms  of  the 
ceremonial  service.  And,  if  the  Egyptians  had  not 
had  these  things,  the  ancestors  of  the  Israelites  came 
from  Babylonia  from  under  the  very  shadows  of  the 
close  of  the  glorious  Sumerian  era  and  they  were  thus 


106  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

lineal  heirs  of  the  Sumerian  ritual  customs.  For  did 
not  the  fathers  serve  the  gods  "beyond  the  flood"? 
But  not  all  these  things  together  constitute  that  Cere- 
monial Service  or  supply  the  "breath  of  life"  which 
the  revelation  at  Sinai  breathed  into  them.  Moreover, 
these  forms  of  Egypt  and  of  Babylonia  were  charged 
with  idolatrous  meaning  utterly  repugnant  and  im- 
possible. These  forms  of  things  had  grown  up  through 
millenniums ;  they  were  at  hand.  Speaking  reverently, 
God  could  not  reveal  to  the  Israelites  these  things  that 
were  already  known  to  them.  At  least,  Aaron,  as  a 
priest,  could  not  but  be  familiar  with  them  and  the 
masses  of  the  people  have  a  common  knowledge  of 
them.  These  forms  were  familiar;  the  heathen  signi- 
ficance was  stripped  away  from  them  in  the  descrip- 
tion given  of  them  and  then  use  was  made  of  them  to 
reveal  a  new  meaning  so  unfamiliar  as  would  require 
most  careful  explanatory  statements,  that  all  unworthy 
significance  should  be  eliminated  and  the  divinely  in- 
tended significance  imparted.  The  Mosaic  sacrifices 
and  those  of  Egypt  look  as  like  to  each  other  super- 
ficially as  things  may  be  expected  to  look,  and  are  just 
as  unlike  in  meaning  as  ceremonies  can  be  expected  to 
mean.  (Cf.  Egyptian  Sacrifices,  Recueil  de  Traveaux 
XXXI,  XXVII,  Kyle;  Ritual  Du  Soleil,  Naville;  also 
Moses  and  the  Monuments,  Chap.  VI,  Kyle). 

What  has  just  been  said  of  the  Ceremonial  System 
is  equally  true,  in  principle,  of  the  directions  for  the 
erection  of  the  Tabernacle  in  the  Wilderness.  The  fact 
that  the  Tabernacle  was,  in  the  main,  of  Egyptian 
architecture,  based  upon  the  unvarying  three-fold 
division  of  Egyptian  houses,  the  court,  the  public  room 
and  the  private  apartment,  characterizing  all  Egyptian 
houses  of  every  kind  from  the  humblest  home  of  the 


SECOND  INVESTIGATION  107 

peasant  to  the  palace  of  the  king,  the  tombs  of  the 
dead,  and  the  temples  of  the  gods  (Cf.  L' Architecture 
Egyptienne,  Maspero,  pp.  5-87.  Also,  Moses  and  the 
Monuments,  Light  from  Archaeology  on  Pentateuchal 
Times,  Kyle,  Chap.  IV),  and  that  the  furniture  of  the 
Tabernacle  was  in  Egyptian  style  and,  in  most  respects 
according  to  Egyptian  customs  (Moses  and  the  Monu- 
ments, Light  from  Archaeology  on  Pentateuchal  Times, 
Kyle,  Chap.  IV),  but  without  idolatrous  significance 
...  all  this  does  not  seriously  alter  the  unfamiliar 
character  of  what  was  to  be  ivritten  about  these  things 
in  the  Pentateuch  to  make  sure  that  the  people  would 
"make  all  the  things  according  to  the  pattern  showed 
in  the  mount."  That  these  forms  of  material  things 
which  were  the  growth  of  centuries  or  of  millenniums 
should  convey  to  the  world  entirely  new  truth  would 
require  much  descriptive  writing.  So  we  should 
naturally  expect  all  the  "statutes"  concerning  these 
things  to  be  descriptive  in  style. 

This  expectation  is  not  disappointed;  the  expected 
actually  occurs.  This  descriptive  style  is  recognized 
by  every  literary  critic  of  the  Modern  School.  It  is 
now  pointed  out  as  one  of  the  marks  of  the  principal 
"documents"  which  is  said  to  have  contributed  to  the 
Pentateuch.  Of  these  Ceremonial  Laws  and  the  direc- 
tions concerning  the  Tabernacle  Kautzsch  {Literature 
of  the  Pentateuch,  p.  108),  says  of  the  Documents  to 
which  he  assigns  these  laws  about  unfamiliar  things, 
"One  of  the  most  notable  signs  (of  the  Documents)  is 
the  style  with  its  unfailing  breadth,  in  its  fondness  for 
exhaustive  details  and  'juristic  formulating'  and  even 
for  pure  schematism." 

It  would  be  useless  to  transliterate  the  Hebrew  of 
any  specimen  passages  of  these  lists  for  the  convenience 


108  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

of  the  reader,  for  this  descriptive  character  of  the  style 
is  quite  as  apparent  in  a  translation  as  in  the  original, 
and  if  possible,  more  apparent  than  is  the  terse  mne- 
monic character  of  the  style  of  the  "judgments"  and 
"commandments."  All  this  will  be  at  once  observed 
in  the  examination  of  the  following  examples: 

2.  Ex.  XXV : 3 1-36 :  "And  thou  shalt  make  a  candle- 
stick of  pure  gold:  of  beaten  work  shall  the  candle- 
stick be  made :  his  shaft,  and  his  branches,  his  bowls, 
his  knops,  and  his  flowers,  shall  be  the  same.  And  six 
branches  shall  comei  out  of  the  sides  of  it:  three 
branches  of  the  candlestick  out  of  the  one  side,  and 
three  branches  of  the  candlestick  out  of  the  other  side : 
three  bowls  made  like  unto  almonds,  with  a  knop  and 
a  flower  in  one  branch :  and  three  bowls  made  like  al- 
monds in  the  other  branch,  with  a  knop  and  a  flower : 
so  in  the  six  branches  that  come  out  of  the  candle- 
stick. And  in  the  candlestick  shall  be  four  bowls 
made  like  unto  almonds,  with  their  knops  and  their 
flowers  and  there  shall  he  a  knop  under  two  branches 
of  the  same,  and  a  knop  under  two  branches  of  the 
same,  and  a  knop  under  two  branches  of  the  same,  ac- 
cording to  the  six  branches  that  proceed  out  of  the 
candlestick.  Their  knops  and  their  branches  shall  be 
of  the  same:  all  it  shall  he  one  beaten  work  of  pure 
gold." 

Descriptive  adjectives  are  not  very  numerous  in  this 
passage,  but  descriptive  phrases  are  piled  up  until  they 
seem  to  topple  over  and  run  down  on  every  side. 

Ex.  XXVIII  :6-12:  "And  they  shall  make  an  ephod 
of  gold,  and  blue,  and  of  purple,  of  scarlet,  and  fine 
twined  linen,  with  cunning  work.  It  shall  have  the  two 
shoulder  pieces  thereof  joined  at  the  edges  thereof: 
and  it  shall  be  joined  together.    And  the  curious  girdle 


SECOND  INVESTIGATION  109 

of  the  ephod,  which  is  upon  it,  shall  be  of  the  same, 
according  to  the  work  thereof:  even  of  gold,  of  blue, 
and  purple,  and  scarlet,  and  fine  twined  linen.  And 
thou  shalt  take  two  onyx  stones,  and  grave  on  them 
the  names  of  the  children  of  Israel :  six  of  their  names 
on  one  stone,  and  the  other  six  names  of  the  rest  on  the 
other  stone,  according  to  their  birth.  With  the  work 
of  an  engraver  in  stone,  like  the  engravings  of  a  signet, 
shalt  thou  engrave  the  two  stones  with  the  names  of 
the  children  of  Israel :  thou  shalt  make  them  to  be  set 
in  ouches  of  gold.  And  thou  shalt  put  the  two  stones 
upon  the  shoulders  of  the  ephod  for  stones  of  memorial 
unto  the  children  of  Israel :  and  Aaron  shall  bear  their 
names  upon  his  two  shoulders  for  a  memorial." 

These  directions  for  the  making  of  the  ephod  show 
the  same  descriptive  method  in  a  very  striking  way. 
So,  also,  do  the  orders  for  the  numbering  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  in 

Ex.  XXX:11-16:  "And  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
saying,  When  thou  takest  the  sum  of  the  children  of 
Israel  after  their  number,  then  shall  they  give  every 
man  a  ransom  for  his  soul  unto  the  Lord,  when  thou 
numberest  them :  that  there  be  no  plague  among  them, 
when  thou  numberest  them.  This  they  shall  give, 
every  one  that  passeth  among  them  that  are  numbered, 
half  a  shekel  after  the  shekel  of  the  sanctuary  (a  shekel 
is  twenty  gerahs)  :  an  half  shekel  shall  be  the  offering 
of  the  Lord.  Every  one  that  passeth  among  them  that 
are  numbered,  from  twenty  years  old  and  above,  shall 
give  an  offering  unto  the  Lord.  The  rich  shall  not  give 
more,  and  the  poor  shall  not  give  less  than  half  a  shekel, 
when  they  give  an  offering  unto  the  Lord,  to  make  an 
atonement  for  your  souls.  And  thou  shalt  take  the 
atonement  money  of  the  children  of  Israel,  and  shall 


110  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

appoint  it  for  the  service  of  the  Tabernacle  of  the 
congregation ;  that  it  may  be  a  memorial  unto  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  before  the  Lord,  to  make  an  atonement 
for  your  souls." 

Lev.  XIII  :28-52,  the  ceremonial  law  of  hygiene  en- 
joined for  the  detection  and  treatment  of  leprosy,  or 
the  resolving  of  a  suspicion  of  it  in  doubtful  cases, 
shows  not  only  the  same  use  of  descriptive  phrases,  but, 
also  a  very  copious  use  of  adjectives,  as  the  quoting  of 
a  few  verses  will  serve  to  illustrate : 

Verses  29-37 :  "If  a  man  or  a  woman  have  a  plague 
on  the  head  or  the  beard ;  then  the  priest  shall  see  the 
plague :  and,  behold,  if  it  be  in  sight  deeper  than  the 
skin;  and  there  be  in  it  a  yellow  thin  hair:  then  the 
priest  shall  pronounce  him  unclean:  it  is  a  dry  scall, 
even  a  leprosy  upon  the  head  or  beard.  And  if  the 
priest  look  on  the  plague  of  the  scall  and,  behold,  it  be 
not  in  sight  deeper  than  the  skin,  and  that  there  is  no 
black  hair  in  it :  then  the  priest  shall  shut  up  him  that 
hath  the  plague  of  the  scall  seven  days:  and  in  the 
seventh  day  the  priest  shall  look  on  the  plague:  and, 
behold,  if  the  scall  spread  not,  and  there  be  in  it  no 
yellow  hair,  and  the  scall  be  not  in  sight  deeper  than 
the  skin :  he  shall  be  shaven,  but  the  scall  shall  he  not 
shave  and  the  priest  shall  shut  him  up  that  hath  the 
scall  seven  days  more:  and  in  the  seventh  day  the 
priest  shall  look  on  the  scall:  and,  behold,  if  the  scall 
be  no1;  spread  in  the  skin,  nor  be  in  sight  deeper  than 
the  skin :  then  the  priest  shall  pronounce  him  clean : 
and  he  shall  wash  his  clothes  and  be  clean.  But  if  the 
scall  spread  much  in  the  skin  after  his  cleansing :  then 
the  priest  shall  look  on  him :  and,  behold,  if  the  scall 
be  spread  in  the  skin,  the  priest  shall  not  seek  for  yel- 
low hair :  he  is  unclean.    But  if  the  scall  be  in  his  sight 


SECOND  INVESTIGATION  111 

at  a  stay,  and  that  there  is  black  hair  grown  up  therein ; 
the  scall  is  healed,  he  is  clean:  and  the  priest  shall 
pronounce  him  clean." 

Lev.  XVI:  15-28  records  the  Sin  offering  for  the 
Holy  place  in  the  same  descriptive  style.  See,  also. 
Num.  XVIII  :26-32  and  XXVIII  :3-8. 

These  passages  cited  are  not  a  few  isolated  passages 
only  which  happen  to  be  in  this  style,  but  correctly 
illustrate  the  general  style  of  the  statutory  directions 
of  every  kind  given  in  the  pentateuchal  legislation,  as 
the  illustration  of  "judgments"  cited  illustrate  the  style 
of  the  "judgments."  Any  one  who  will  read  for  ten 
minutes  consecutively  in  the  "judgments"  of  Ex.  XXI: 
1-XXIII:19,  and  then  ten  minutes  anywhere  in  the 
directions  for  the  construction  of  the  Tabernacle,  Ex. 
XXV-XXX,  or  in  the  Ceremonial  Laws  of  Leviticus, 
will  need  no  argument  to  convince  him  that  there  is  a 
most  striking  difference  of  style  between  these  two 
parts  of  the  Pentateuchal  legislation,  i.e.  between  the 
style  of  composition  of  the  two  KINDS  of  laws  con- 
tained in  these  two  parts  and  that  this  difference  is 
aptly  described  as  Mnemonic  and  Descriptive. 

When,  now,  the  laws  written  in  this  Descriptive  style 
are  closely  scrutinized  it  is  to  be  observed  that,  with 
the  exception  of  a  very  few  "judgments"  on  unfamiliar 
subjects,  and  a  few  "statutes  of  judgment"  which  were 
new  and  very  special  legislation  or  approved  regula- 
tions for  the  modification  and  mitigation  of  existing 
"judgments,"  they  are  all  "statutes,"  laws  of  procedure 
of  various  kinds.  There  is  the  Ceremonial  Law,  first 
of  all,  with  all  its  directions  concerning  sacrifices,  and 
concerning  clean  and  unclean  things;  then  the  direc- 
tions for  the  construction  of  the  Tabernacle  and  its 
furniture  and  the  vestments  of  the  priests,  and  statu- 


112  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

tory  directions  concerning  feasts.  Moreover,  there  are 
very  few  "statutes"  not  written  in  this  Descriptive 
style,  only  those  "statutes"  concerning  the  most  com- 
mon sacrifices,  especially,  and  almost  exclusively,  the 
small  list  of  "statutes"  found  in  the  laws  given  to  Is- 
rael before  the  directions  were  given  to  Israel  for  the 
Tabernacle  and  its  elaborate  ritual,  and  which  were 
to  be  remembered  by  the  people. 

Eg.  Ex.  XX  :24-26 : 

"An  altar  of  earth  thou  shalt  make  unto  me,  and 
shalt  sacrifice  thereon  thy  burnt  offerings,  and  thy 
peace  offerings,  thy  sheep  and  thine  oxen :  in  all  places 
where  I  record  my  name  I  will  come  unto  thee  and  I 
will  bless  thee.  And  if  thou  wilt  make  me  an  altar  of 
stone,  thou  shalt  not  build  it  of  hewn  stone :  for  if  thou 
lift  up  thy  tool  upon  it,  thou  hast  polluted  it.  Neither 
shalt  thou  go  up  by  steps  unto  mine  altar,  that  thy 
nakedness  be  not  discovered  thereon." 

The  significance  of  the  fact  that  the  "statutes"  were 
thus  written  almost  wholly  in  this  Descriptive  style  in 
distinction  from  the  "judgments"  as  well  as  the  "Com- 
mandments," which  were,  on  the  other  hand,  written 
almost  entirely  in  the  Mnemonic  style,  is  easily  dis- 
coverable, when  all  the  material  lies  before  us.  We 
have  seen  that  the  "judgments"  were  most  appro- 
priately in  the  Mnemonic  form,  since,  not  only  were 
they  "judgings,"  which  passed  from  mouth  to  mouth  a 
long  time  before  being  written  down  in  the  Pentateuch, 
a  process  which  always  tends  toward  terseness,  and 
often  toward  minstrelsy  in  literary  form,  but  they 
needed,  also,  to  be  memorized  by  the  judges  that  these 
might  readily  attend  to  the  business  of  their  courts, 
and  the  people,  also,  needed  to  be  as  familiar  as  pos- 
sible with  such  laws  that  they  might  be  law-abiding 
citizens. 


SECOND  INVESTIGATION  113 

Now  it  is  equally  apparent  that,  with  the  exception 
of  the  few  common  and  most  familiar  laws  of  sacrifice 
given  before  the  Ceremonial  Law,  which  all  the  people 
needed  to  know,  the  "statutes"  were  only  special  in- 
struction in  unfamiliar  things  and  for  specialists. 
Bezaleel  and  his  fellow  artisans  were  the  only  ones 
who  needed  to  know  the  instructions  for  the  construc- 
tion of  the  Tabernacle,  and  the  fabrication  of  its 
furniture  and  the  vestments  of  its  priests.  The  priests 
who  directed  the  sacrifices  and  all  the  ritual  of  the 
Ceremonial  Law  were  the  only  ones  who  needed  to  be 
familiar  with  the  "statutes"  which  prescribed  it.  These 
were  of  the  educated  classes  who  could  read,  and, 
properly  for  them,  the  "statutes"  were,  with  all  their 
unfamiliar  ideas,  written  in  this  Descriptive  form  that 
they  might  rightly  understand  and  follow  the  direc- 
tions with  accuracy,  and  so  lead  the  people.  Once 
familiarized  by  them,  the  ritual  would  go  on  by  rote, 
but  the  "statutes"  having  been  written  down  in  this 
Descriptive  form  were  fixed  and  would  not  thereafter 
take,  in  writing,  a  brief  sententious  form  like  the 
"judgments"  which  acquired  this  form  before  being 
written  down.  Thus  we  have  the  "judgments"  in  the 
Mnemonic  form  and  the  "statutes"  in  the  Descriptive 
form.  The  people  would  have  no  need  to  be  familiar 
with  the  "statutes"  as  with  the  "judgments,"  for,  while 
they  must  live  their  lives  themselves,  they  were  under 
the  immediate  direction  of  the  priests,  when  they  came 
to  present  themselves  in  the  Tabernacle  service.  Of 
course,  no  one  in  Israel  other  than  Bezaleel  and  his 
assistants  would  have  any  occasion,  other  than  vain 
curiosity,  to  study  the  directions  for  the  construction 
of  the  Tabernacle.  Thus  the  Descriptive  style,  as  well 
as  the  Mnemonic  style,  is  not  only  distinctly  observ- 


114  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

able,  but  equally  natural  and  appropriate  to  the  de- 
mands of  the  occasion. 

in.    HORTATORY 

1.  Thus  far  our  investigation  of  the  different 
LITERARY  FORMS  in  which  the  various  KINDS  of 
laws  of  the  Pentateuch  have  been  cast  has  wholly 
omitted  any  consideration  of  the  statement  of  laws 
found  in  Deuteronomy.  This  is  because,  while  isolated 
passages  from  Deuteronomy  would  illustrate  now  the 
Mnemonic  style  of  the  "judgments"  and  now  the  De- 
scriptive style  of  the  "statutes"  found  in  the  other 
books  of  the  law,  the  book  of  Deuteronomy  as  a  whole, 
is  neither  Mnemonic  nor  Descriptive  in  style,  nor  a 
combination  of  both,  but  something  very  different 
from  either  the  one  or  the  other.  Even  a  very  cursory 
reading  of  the  book  of  Deuteronomy,  in  comparison 
with  the  books  of  Exodus,  Leviticus  and  Numbers, 
must  make  clear  to  even  the  merest  tyro  in  literature 
that  the  LITERARY  FORM  of  this  book  is  most 
markedly  different  from  the  form  of  the  other  books 
of  the  Law. 

It  gives  account,  indeed,  of  the  journey ings  in  the 
wilderness,  and  of  many  of  the  events  in  their  proper 
order,  but  the  fragmentary,  journalistic  character  of 
the  other  books.  Exodus,  Leviticus  and  Numbers,  is 
almost  entirely  wanting.  In  place  of  annals,  the  four 
addresses  of  Moses  stand  out  as  four  monographs,  and 
the  combining  of  these  with  some  introductory  sen- 
tences and  connecting  narratives  and  a  brief  conclusion 
give  the  impression  of  a  book  struck  off  at  one  time, 
and  that  in  order  to  make  more  lasting  the  manifest 
purpose  of  the  addresses  themselves  to  exhort  and 
stimulate  the  people  to  a  continued  and  more  earnest 


SECOND  INVESTIGATION  115 

and  lively  observance  of  the  many  instructions  in  the 
law,  received  during  the  wilderness  life.  The  fragmen- 
tary and  long  drawn-out  teaching  during  the  wilder- 
ness journeys  had  afforded  opportunity  to  dull  the 
edge  of  the  impression  which  the  divine  instructions 
should  make.  These  summarizing  addresses  would  re- 
fresh the  impression  already  made,  but  partly  effaced 
by  time  and  varied  experiences,  and  the  immediate  re- 
cord of  the  addresses  in  Deuteronomy  would  give  per- 
manence to  the  effect.  These  addresses  in  Deuteron- 
omy have  all  the  appearance  of  review  lectures  at  the 
close  of  a  long  course  of  teaching  and  training,  exactly 
as,  indeed,  they  purport  to  be. 

The  laws  in  the  book  of  Deuteronomy  are  almost  the 
same  as  already  given  and  recorded  in  the  earlier  books 
of  the  law,  but  there  is  much  summarizing,  more  at- 
tention is  given  to  civil  life  and  less  to  the  religious 
ceremonies,  and  there  is  shown  just  such  advancement 
in  national  life  and  religious  attainments  as  two  gen- 
erations of  training  under  divine  tutelage  would  war- 
rant us  in  expecting  the  people  now  to  be  able  to  re- 
ceive, and  such  additions  to  the  laws  as  were  needed 
in  anticipation  of  immediate  entrance  into  the 
Promised  Land. 

But  the  LITERARY  FORM  into  which  all  the  ad- 
dresses of  Deuteronomy  are  cast  in  this  summarizing 
of  the  laws  is  strikingly  different  from  the  form  given 
to  any  of  the  laws  before  this  time.  This  is  exactly  as 
we  might  have  expected  it  would  be,  if  we  had  anti- 
cipated the  various  purposes  for  which  the  laws  were 
given  at  different  times.  We  have  laws  for  very 
familiar  use  by  magistrate  and  people  Mnemonic  in 
FORM,  laws  for  careful  study  and  application  by  the 
educated   priesthood  more   Descriptive   and  explana- 


116  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATOUCH 

tory  in  character  and  FORM.  It  must  be  immediately 
evident  that  the  one  remaining  use  for  laws,  their 
adaptation  to  public  address  by  statesmen,  who 
would  give  impulse  to  national  movements,  calls  for 
another  LITERARY  FORM  quite  as  distinct  and  char- 
acteristic as  are  these  that  we  have  examined.  The 
judge  of  today  will  cast  his  thoughts  into  one  form, 
brief,  terse  and  pointed,  in  giving  a  decision  from  the 
bench:  into  quite  another  form  in  the  explanation  of 
statutes  for  the  instruction  of  a  class  of  students  in  a 
law  school,  or  in  conferences  with  his  colleagues  upon 
the  meaning  of  laws:  and  into  still  another,  and  very 
different  form,  if  called  upon  to  mold  public  opinion, 
and  give  impulse  to  public  and  habitual  action  by 
means  of  popular  addresses  upon  these  same  laws. 
Exactly  so,  we  have  the  Mnemonic  "commandments" 
and  "judgments,"  for  memorizing  by  the  magistrates 
and  the  people  and  the  Descriptive  "statutes"  for  the 
instruction  of  the  priests  who  should  lead  the  people  in 
their  ceremonial  ritual  of  new  and  wonderful  spiritual 
content.  So,  also,  in  Deuteronomy  we  have  the  Horta- 
tory FORM  of  expression  by  which  all  these  various 
KINDS  of  laws,  but  especially  those  pertaining  to  the 
civil  and  political  life  of  the  people,  were  set  forth  in 
public  addresses  by  the  great  law-giver  to  stir  up  in 
their  minds  a  more  lively  conception  of  the  laws  al- 
ready given,  and  to  give  greater  impulse  toward 
righteous  activity  in  Israel  as  they  were  about  to  enter 
the  Promised  Land. 

2.  This  Hortatory  FORM  of  the  addresses  of  Moses 
in  Deuteronomy,  like  the  Mnemonic  FORM  of  the 
"judgments"  and  the  Descriptive  FORM  of  the  "stat- 
utes" in  all  the  other  books  of  the  Law,  is  quite  as  ap- 
parent  in  a  translation,  as   in  the  original,   of  the 


SECOND  INVESTIGATION  117 

Pentateuch.  Indeed,  it  is  so  apparent  that  it  seems 
hardly  necessary  to  give  here  any  illustrations;  the 
v^hole  book  of  Deuteronomy  is  the  best  illustration. 

It  would  be  impossible  to  read  the  eloquent  appeal 
for  obedience  in  Deut.  IV:7-11  without  feeling  in  a 
very  special  way  the  influence  of  this  Hortatory  FORM 
of  expression. 

"For  what  nation  is  there  so  great  who  hath  God  so 
nigh  unto  them,  as  the  Lord  our  God  is  in  all  things 
that  we  call  upon  him  for  ?  And  what  nation  is  there 
so  great,  that  hath  statutes  and  judgments  so  righteous 
as  all  this  law,  which  I  set  before  you  this  day?  Only 
take  heed  thyself,  and  keep  thy  soul  diligently,  lest 
thou  forget  the  things  which  thine  eyes  have  seen,  and 
lest  they  depart  from  thy  heart  all  the  days  of  thy  life ; 
but  teach  them  thy  sons  and  thy  sons'  sons.  Specially 
the  day  that  thou  stoodest  before  the  Lord  thy  God  in 
Horeb,  when  the  Lord  said  unto  me.  Gather  me  the 
people  together,  and  I  will  make  them  hear  my  words, 
that  they  may  learn  to  fear  me  all  the  days  that  they 
shall  live  upon  the  earth,  and  that  they  may  teach  their 
children.  And  we  came  near  and  stood  under  the 
mountain :  and  the  mountain  burned  with  fire  unto  the 
midst  of  heaven,  with  darkness,  clouds  and  thick  dark- 
ness." 

Or  consider  this  inspiration  to  patriotism,  Deut. 
XX:l-4: 

"When  thou  goest  out  to  battle  against  thine 
enemies,  and  seest  horses,  and  chariots,  and  the  people 
more  than  thou,  be  not  afraid  of  them  for  the  Lord  thy 
God  is  with  thee,  which  brought  thee  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt.  And  it  shall  be,  when  ye  are  come  nigh  unto 
the  battle  that  the  priest  shall  approach,  and  speak 
unto  the  people,  and  shall  say  unto  them.   Hear,  O 


118  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

Israel:  ye  approach  this  day  unto  battle  against  your 
enemies;  let  not  your  hearts  faint:  fear  not,  and  do 
not  tremble,  neither  be  ye  terrified  because  of  them: 
for  the  Lord  your  God  is  he  that  goeth  with  you,  to 
fight  for  you  against  your  enemies,  to  save  you." 

Or  take  this  extract  from  the  fearful  description  of 
the  consequence  of  disobedience  in  Deut.  XXVIII; 
15-68,  especially  37-44 : 

"And  thou  shalt  become  an  astonishment,  a  proverb, 
and  by-word,  among  all  nations  whither  the  Lord  shall 
lead  them.  Thou  shalt  carry  much  seed  out  into  the 
field,  and  shalt  gather  but  little  in :  for  the  locust  shall 
consume  it.  Thou  shalt  plant  vineyards,  and  dress 
them,  but  shalt  neither  drink  of  the  wine,  nor  gather 
the  grapes :  for  the  worms  shall  eat  them.  Thou  shalt 
have  olive  trees  throughout  all  thy  coast,  but  thou  shalt 
not  annoint  thyself  with  the  oil:  for  thine  olive  shall 
cast  his  fruit.  Thou  shalt  beget  sons  and  daughters, 
but  thou  shalt  not  enjoy  them:  for  they  shall  go  into 
captivity.  All  thy  trees  and  fruit  of  thy  land  shall  the 
locusts  consume.  The  stranger  that  is  within  thee 
shall  get  up  above  thee  very  high :  and  thou  shalt  come 
down  very  low.  He  shall  lend  to  thee,  and  thou  shalt 
not  lend  to  him:  he  shall  be  the  head,  and  thou  shalt 
be  the  tail." 

For  further  special  illustrations  of  this  Hortatory 
FORM  of  Deuteronomy,  see  Deut.  IV,  VI,  IX,  XIII, 
XVII,  XX,  XXVII,  XXVIII,  XXIX,  XXXII,  and 
XXXIII. 

It  is  important  to  note  here  in  concluding  this  in- 
vestigation what  has  been  intimated  at  different  places 
throughout  it,  that  this  distinction  between  the  Mne- 
monic, the  Descriptive  and  the  Hortatory  is  not  main- 
tained in  the  highesjt  degree  in  every  paragraph  of 


SECOND  INVESTIGATION  119 

these  different  parts  of  the  Pentateuch.  We  have 
found  that  there  are  some  "judgments"  about  com- 
paratively unfamiliar  things  and  these  are  necessarily- 
more  or  less  Descriptive  in  expression.  There  are  also 
"statutes"  concerning  most  common  portions  of  the 
ritual  and  they  are  brief  and  terse,  perhaps,  also,  in- 
tended for  memorizing.  There  are,  also,  some  pas- 
sages in  the  addresses  of  Moses  in  Deuteronomy, 
which  lag  far  below  the  highest  flights  of  his  oratory. 
In  this  investigation  concerning  the  Literary  expres- 
sion of  the  various  KINDS  of  laws,  as  in  the  first  in- 
vestigation concerning  legal  terms,  it  is  not  in  absolute 
uniformity  of  expression  that  the  different  classes  of 
laws  are  distinguished  the  one  from  the  other,  but  in 
the  degree  of  uniformity.  These  FORMS  of  expres- 
sion, the  Mnemonic,  the  Descriptive  and  the  Hortatory, 
do  indisputably  prevail  in  these  different  KINDS  of 
laws :  it  is  this  prevalence  that  differentiates  the  USES 
of  these  different  KINDS  of  laws  the  one  from  the 
other.  This  prevailing  distinction  in  expression  in 
different  parts  of  the  Pentateuch  has  sometimes  been 
minimized  and  even  denied  in  the  heat  of  controversy 
by  those  who  have  opposed  the  Documentary  Hypothe- 
sis. But  it  indisputably  exists  and  its  existence  can 
hardly  be  too  much  insisted  upon. 


Chapter  III 

THIRD  INVESTIGATION 

Concerning  the  Effect  of  Technical  Terms  and 
Literary  Forms  on  Style  and  Vocabulary 

I.  A  third  investigation  was  made  concerning  the 
relation  of  the  different  KINDS  of  laws,  found  in  the 
first  investigation,  and  the  different  USES  of  laws, 
found  in  the  second  investigation  to  the  Diction  and 
Style  of  the  various  parts  of  the  Pentateuch,  in  which 
these  different  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws  are  to  be 
noted.  Some  things  have  already  appeared  incident- 
ally on  this  subject,  but  much  more  yet  remains  to  be 
said  distinctly  upon  certain  specific  questions.  The 
word  "style"  has  been  carefully  avoided  in  the  second 
investigation,  "form"  or  "expression"  being  employed 
in  the  discussion  of  the  literary  qualities  under  con- 
sideration. It  is  important  here  to  observe  carefully  the 
distinct  difference  that  exists  between  form  and  style 
in  literature.  Shakespeare  and  Tennyson  and  Brown- 
ing are  all  in  poetic  form,  but  how  different  the  style ! 
The  Anabasis  of  Xenophon,  Victor  Hugo's  account  of 
the  battle  of  Waterloo,  and  Robinson  Crusoe  are  all 
descriptive  in  form,  but  here,  also,  how  different  the 
style !  Demosthenes  on  the  Crown,  the  reply  of  Logan 
the  Mingo  chief  to  Lord  Dunmore,  and  Lincoln's  Get- 

120 


THIRD  INVESTIGATION  121 

tysburg  address,  are  all  oratorical  in  form  and  expres- 
sion, but  again,  how  different  the  style!  Literary 
form  is  rhetorical  architecture,  style  is  the  work  of  the 
decorator.  Now  the  architecture  of  a  building  has 
much  to  do  with  determining  the  style  of  decoration, 
not  only  so,  but  the  kind  of  building  it  is,  and  the  par- 
ticular use  to  which  it  is  to  be  put  also  reflect  them- 
selves in  the  decorations.  Byzantine  architecture  is 
certain  to  have  much  to  do  with  the  decorations  em- 
ployed with  it,  and  quite  as  certainly  a  dwelling  house 
and  a  church  in  this  style  of  architecture  will  each 
influence  very  much  the  style  of  decoration  given  to  it, 
and  again  among  dwelling  houses,  the  caravansary  and 
the  palace  will  vary  much  in  the  decorative  treatment 
given  them. 

So  it  is  in  literature :  the  form,  or  architecture,  of  it 
and  the  use  for  which  it  is  intended  has  much  to  do 
with  the  style,  or  decoration  given  a  production. 
Failure  to  observe  this  distinction  between  Form  and 
Style  in  literature,  and  the  relation  of  the  one  to  the 
other,  has  introduced  much  confusion  into  criticism. 
All  the  differences  already  observed  in  the  literature 
of  different  parts  of  the  Pentateuch  have  been  called 
Style  and  these  differences  of  "style"  attributed  to 
different  authors. 

Style  is,  indeed,  personal  property  which  originates 
and  terminates  in  the  author ;  while,  on  the  other  hand, 
form  is  common  property  which  neither  originates  nor 
terminates  in  any  author,  but  is  a  common  frame-work, 
the  architecture,  according  to  which  various  authors 
build  in  keeping  with  what  is  to  be  built,  and  adorn  it, 
each  in  his  own  personal  style  in  each  case.  Any  par- 
ticular author's  style  may  vary  greatly  with  the  dif- 
ferent form  of  literature  which  he  employs  and  he 


122  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

makes  choice,  also,  among  the  different  forms  accord- 
ing to  the  subject  of  which  he  wishes  to  treat.  No 
more  striking  difference  in  style  may  be  found  in 
literature  than  between  Milton's  poetical  works  and 
his  controversial  papers.  Here  style  undoubtedly  goes 
back  to  form,  and  form  to  the  subject,  for  its  origin. 
What  a  miserable  fiasco  would  the  papers  have  been 
in  the  form  of  the  Paradise  Lost !  or  Comus  in  the  form 
of  the  Tenure  of  Kings  and  Magistrates! 

11.  So  Form  is  not  Style  in  literature ;  but  Form  is 
intimately  related  to  Style.  Even  the  form  of  stanza 
in  Shakespeare  and  other  poets  has  relation  to  the 
style  in  each  case,  and  on  the  other  hand,  the  form  has, 
also,  relation  to  the  subject  and  the  purpose  in  view. 
There  is  a  Mnemonic  form  of  literature  among  the 
laws  of  the  Pentateuch,  there  are,  also,  laws  that  are 
Descriptive  and  still  others  that  are  Hortatory  in  form 
according  to  the  purpose  in  view  in  each  case.  These 
lav/s  would  still  be  in  these  various  forms,  though 
somebody  else  wrote  them  down.  His  style  might  be 
very  different,  and  it  in  turn  would,  in  like  manner, 
be  affected  by  the  form.  Thus  the  form  of  these  laws, 
though  something  quite  distinct  from  the  style  of  the 
author  in  each  case,  has  yet  something  to  do  with  his 
style.  The  Descriptive  form  in  literature  may  vary 
in  style  with  each  author  as  we  have  seen  in  the  case 
of  Herodotus,  Victor  Hugo  and  de  Foe,  yet  the  form 
does  affect  the  style.  In  like  manner  there  is  such  a 
thing  as  style  among  orators,  who  are  yet  all  orators ; 
and  yet  oratory,  in  every  case,  affects  the  style,  even 
as  a  stimulent  quickens  to  activity  of  life. 

Mnemonic  literature,  with  its  far  less  breadth,  and 
thus  greater  limitations,  in  style,  has  yet  displays  of 
style,  as  the  Sybbilene  oracles  differ  in  style  from  the 


THIRD   INVESTIGATION  123 

rhyming  geographies  of  our  grandfather's  days,  and 
these  from  the  Mother  Goose  rhymes  of  the  nursery. 
The  subject  or  intent  which  requires  different  forms 
works  through  them  to  make  itself  felt  in  the  style. 
These  relations  between  Form  and  Style  in  literature 
will  become  at  once  more  apparent  when  we  consider 
what  it  is  in  each  case  which  calls  for  different  forms 
in  literature.  Why  do  authors  employ  different  Forms 
in  literature  ?  Why  do  builders  employ  different  Forms 
of  architecture?  Because  they  are  concerned  about 
different  Kinds  of  buildings  and  erect  these  buildings 
in  very  different  environments  which,  in  turn,  present 
different  requirements  and  furnish  different  mater- 
ials, i.e.  the  architects  erect  different  KINDS  of  build- 
ings intended  for  different  purposes  or  USES.  So, 
authors  employ  different  Forms  of  literature  for  dif- 
ferent subjects,  i.e.  different  KINDS  of  thought,  and 
that  for  different  purposes,  i.e.  different  USES,  and 
these  KINDS  and  USES  of  thought  are,  in  turn,  af- 
fected, and  largely  determined,  by  the  environment  of 
the  author  and  the  materials  which  perception  and  con- 
sciousness affords.  If  we  investigate  the  subjects  and 
purposes  of  the  writers  of  the  Pentateuchal  laws  we 
may  expect  to  find  reasons  for  the  different  Forms 
which  we  have  already  discovered  in  these  subjects 
and  purposes  which  lie  back  of  them  and  produced 
them,  and  discover,  also,  the  great  effect  which  these 
different  Forms,  and  the  subjects  and  purposes,  which 
lie  back  of  them  and  produced  them,  had  upon  Style 
in  the  different  parts  of  the  Pentateuchal  laws. 

To  summarize  the  discussion,  there  is  a  poetic,  or 
rhythmic,  FORM  of  literature,  to  beautify ;  a  Descrip- 
tive, or  narrative  FORM,  to  clarify ;  and  an  ORATORI- 
CAL, or  impassioned  FORM,  to  intensify,  and  in  these 


124  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

various  FORMS  of  literature,  there  may  be  almost  as 
many  different  STYLES  as  there  are  different  authors, 
and  these  various  authors  are,  in  turn,  played  upon 
by  the  various  KINDS  of  thought  they  have  to  ex- 
press and  the  various  USES  to  which  their  thought 
is  to  be  put. 

III.  The  different  literary  Forms  of  the  laws  of 
the  Pentateuch  in  its  various  parts  are  the  result,  as 
we  have  seen  in  the  first  two  investigations,  of  the 
different  subjects  treated,  i.e.  different  KINDS  of 
laws,  and  the  different  purposes  for  which  the  various 
KINDS  of  laws  were  intended,  i.e.  the  different  USES 
of  laws:  let  us  note  what  effect  these  Subjects  and 
Purposes,  i.e.  KINDS  and  USES,  have  upon  Style  and 
Vocabulary. 

1.  Subjects.  The  various  Subjects  which,  in  part, 
give  rise  to  the  various  literary  Forms  in  which  the 
different  parts  of  the  Pentateuch  are  cast,  lead  us  at 
once,  upon  knowledge  of  them,  to  expect  decided  dif- 
ferences in  vocabulary  and  arrangement  and  all  the 
other  qualities  which  go  to  make  up  that  subtle  liter- 
ary quality  called  Style.  "Judgments"  concern  them- 
selves with  rights  and  wrongs,  ofttimes  mention  crimes 
and  their  penalties  and  at  other  times  present  civil 
causes  of  strife  "one  with  another."  Naturally,  "judg- 
ments" employ  words  denoting  such  crimes  and  civil 
controversies,  the  penalties  assessed  for  the  crimes 
and  the  proper  adjustments  for  the  civil  strife.  These 
being  matters  of  common  knowledge,  such  laws  would 
not  require  many  descriptive  words  to  make  them  in- 
telligible to  the  people.  It  seems  superfluous  now  to 
add  that  these  peculiarities  are  actually  found  to  be 
employed  in  the  "judgments." 

On  the  other  hand,  the  "statutes,"  of  things  civil  or 


THffiD   INVESTIGATION  125 

religious,  about  Vvhich  the  law-giver  announces  arbi- 
trary enactments  concerning  things  not  right  or  wrong 
in  themselves,  i.e.  mala  in  se,  but  only  made  so  by  the 
"statute,"  i.  e.  mala  prohibita,  call  for  vocabularies  and 
all  the  other  elements  of  Style  very  different  from 
those  of  the  "judgments."  The  words  denoting  crimes 
and  penalties,  so  common  in  the  "judgments,"  will  be 
entirely  wanting  here,  while  words  denoting  archi- 
tectural ideas,  as  in  the  directions  for  the  construction 
of  the  Tabernacle,  "the  pattern  showed  in  the  mount," 
those  denoting  stuffs  and  jewels,  as  in  the  furniture  of 
the  Tabernacle  and  the  vestments  of  the  priests,  direc- 
tions for  the  sacrifices  and  acts  of  devotion,  as  in  the 
Ceremonial  Law,  must  abound  in  these  "statutes." 
Then,  the  subject  matter  of  the  "statutes"  being  less 
familiar,  or,  as  in  some  cases,  not  familiar  at  all,  natur- 
ally requires  the  use  of  descriptive  words  and  phrases 
more  abundantly  that  the  laws  may  be  more  clearly  in- 
telligible. 

The  "commandments,"  because  of  their  fundamental 
character,  naturally  require  vocabularies  somewhat 
peculiar  to  themselves;  and  because  of  their  deeply 
moral  character,  they  call  for  vocabularies  more  akin 
to  the  vocabulary  of  the  "judgments"  than  to  that  of 
the  "statutes."  This  needs  only  to  be  mentioned  and 
need  not  be  illustrated  here. 

The  sum  of  all  these  considerations  about  the  vocabu- 
laries of  the  different  KINDS  of  laws  is  this:  Dif- 
ferent subjects  require  different  vocabularies  to  ex- 
press the  treatment  of  them,  quite  as  much  as  they 
require  different  terms  to  denominate  them.  Also, 
subjects  differing  so  much  from  each  other  as  to  be 
sharply  differentiated  by  technical  terms  lead  to  great 
differences  in  vocabulary,  as  great  differences,  indeed, 


126  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

as  different  authors  use.  Certainly  our  criminal  laws 
differ  as  much  in  vocabulary  from  the  rubrics  of  re- 
ligious worship,  as  Milton  differs  in  diction  from 
Shakespeare,  Goethe  from  Bismarck,  Victor  Hugo 
from  Balzac,  or  any  other  two  modern  literati  differ 
from  each  other. 

2.  Purpose.  Different  parts  of  the  laws  of  the 
Pentateuch  were  given,  as  we  have  seen,  for  very  dif- 
ferent purposes;  some  for  application  in  the  magis- 
trates' courts,  some  for  use  as  a  rubric  in  religious 
worship  conducted  by  priests,  some  for  the  guidance 
of  expert  artisans  in  the  erection  of  the  Tabernacle  as 
a  place  of  worship,  and  in  the  preparation  of  furniture 
and  vestments  for  its  ritual,  and  still  other  statements 
of  laws  were  intended  for  the  instruction  and  exhorta- 
tion of  a  public  assembly.  And  different  purposes  re- 
quire different,  very  different,  diction,  arrangement, 
and  all  the  other  elements  that  go  to  make  up  literary 
style. 

It  is  a  poor  rhetorician  that  cannot  adapt  himself 
to  his  audience  and  occasion.  How  delightfully  dif- 
ferent are  some  of  our  great  preachers  in  a  sermonette 
to  the  children  and  in  the  usual  sermon  to  the  congre- 
gation which  immediately  follows.  Sometimes  the 
congregation  wishes  that  the  sermonette  would  con- 
tinue all  the  way  through !  Not  only  is  this  difference 
affected  by  the  purpose  with  different  subjects,  but 
is  just  as  marked,  when  the  same  subject  is  discussed 
with  a  different  purpose  in  mind  even  on  similar  great 
occasions.  Compare  President  Wilson  in  his  peace 
message  to  Congress  (Jan.  22,  1917)  with  President 
Wilson  in  his  war  message  to  the  same  Congress  (April 
2,  1917).  How  unlike  the  same  person,  though  dis- 
cussing the  same  great  subject  before  the  same  audi- 


THIRD   INVESTIGATION  127 

ence!  How  very  different  the  style  and  the  spirit, 
and,  in  some  measure,  the  vocabulary!  But  why 
should  it  be  necessary  to  heap  up  additional  evidence  on 
this  subject?  Who,  that  listens  to  public  speaking, 
does  not  know  that  different  purposes  and  different 
occasions  require  different  styles  and  vocabularies 
quite  as  much  as  do  different  authors  ?  How  monoton- 
ous and  tiresome  to  listen  to  a  public  speaker  who 
drones  along  in  the  same  fashion  and  with  the  same 
diction  on  all  subjects,  using  pet  words  and  phrases 
over  and  over  until  they  become  positively  painful. 
What  a  lot  of  "doublets"  we  sometimes  hear! 

Now,  as  we  have  seen,  different  parts  of  the  Penta- 
teuchal  laws  were  intended  for  different  uses  on  very 
different  occasions ;  some  for  the  common  daily  use  of 
judges  on  the  bench,  some  for  the  guidance  of  the 
priests,  and  so  to  be  used  as  books  of  reference  by  an 
educated  priesthood;  others  still  were  intended  for 
public  address,  as  were  the  exhortations  of  Moses  to 
the  people  in  the  Plains  of  Moab.  These  different 
USES  and  different  occasions  were  so  marked  that 
they  give  rise  to  some  of  the  laws  being  Mnemonic  in 
form,  that  judges  might  easily  remember  them :  others 
Descriptive,  that  the  priests  should  easily  understand 
them :  and  others  Hortatory  that  the  people  should  be 
moved  to  obey  and  do  them.  With  these  facts  in  mind, 
it  seems  a  waste  of  words  to  argue  that  these  different 
purposes  and  different  occasions  would  certainly  re- 
sult in  great  differences  of  literary  style.  The  Mne- 
monic "commandments"  and  "judgments"  with  their 
brevity  and  terseness  and  rhythm,  present  a  style  as 
clearly  marked  as  is  that  of  the  Roman  Laws  of  the 
Twelve  Tables.  The  Descriptive  expression  of  the  Law 
in  the  "statutes,"  becomes  more  verbose,  even  some- 


128  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

times  florid  in  expression,  and  the  addresses  of  Moses, 
intended  to  inspire  obedience  and  fine  patriotism  and 
incite  spiritual  fervor,  do,  indeed,  take  on  the  im- 
passioned style  of  such  statesmanlike  oratory.  More- 
over, these  marked,  and  intentionally,  different  literary 
styles  cannot  but  react  upon  vocabulary  and  change  it 
still  more,  for  style  depends  quite  as  much  upon  the 
choice  of  words  as  upon  the  arrangement  of  words  and 
the  spirit  of  the  author.  Thus  appears  how  great  has 
been  the  mistake  of  those  critics  who  have  attributed 
ail  or  nearly  all  literary  peculiarities  to  the  Style  of 
authors  allowing  little  or  nothing  to  the  demands  of 
the  various  literary  Forms  by  the  different  KINDS  of 
Pentateuchal  Law  and  different  USES  intended  by 
the  Pentateuchal  law-giver. 

IV.  Summary  of  resulting  Style.  There  are  thus 
to  be  expected,  and  there  are  actually  found,  great  dif- 
ferences of  Style  and  vocabulary  in  different  parts 
of  the  Pentateuch.  These  differences  have  been  at  the 
basis  of  nearly  all  the  critical  discussions  of  the  Penta- 
teuch during  the  last  century.  Though  historical  dif- 
ficulties have  often  been  assigned  as  a  reason  for  the 
divisions  of  the  Pentateuch,  they  have  usually  been 
after-thoughts  as  reasons,  the  differences  of  Style  and 
vocabulary  have  furnished  the  first  criteria  upon  which 
the  divisions  have  been  made.  The  lists  of  such  marks 
of  Style  as  are  set  forth  as  criteria  for  the  various 
Documents  of  the  Pentateuch  cover  about  35  pages  in 
the  Oxford  Hexateuch. 

These  differences  of  Style  and  vocabulary  have  been 
often,  and  very  plausibly,  accounted  for  by  the  sup- 
position of  different  authors  for  different  portions  of 
the  Pentateuch.  And  when  literary  Form  is  ignored, 
as  it  has  so  largely  been  in  criticism  of  the  Pentateuch, 


THIRD   INVESTIGATION  129 

and  all  peculiarities  are  attributed  to  Style,  it  is  quite 
natural  and  logical  to  trace  this  Style  in  the  main  to 
authorship. 

Even  on  the  most  conservative  views  of  the  com- 
position of  the  Pentateuch,  different  authors  have  in 
some  measure  to  do  with  these  differences  in  Style 
and  vocabulary:  for  "commandments"  announced  by 
the  voice  of  God  from  the  summit  of  the  mountain, 
and  "judgments,"  the  decisions  of  judges  recognized 
as  common  law,  would  not  represent  the  style  of  Moses, 
which,  on  this  view  of  the  giving  of  the  Law,  only  ap- 
pears in  the  "statutes,"  in  direction  concerning  the  Tab- 
ernacle and  the  Ceremonial  Law,  in  narrative  portions, 
and  in  the  impassioned  oratory  of  the  addresses  on  the 
Plains  of  Moab. 

But  far  more  than  the  effect  of  such  differences  of 
authorship  has  been  the  effect  of  the  Form  of  litera- 
ture arising  from  the  different  subjects  and  different 
purposes,  an  effect  almost  wholly  overlooked  in  criti- 
cal discussions.  These  different  subjects  of  law,  which 
so  clearly  appear,  and  these  different  purposes  for 
which  the  laws  were  intended  and  to  which  the  laws 
were  put,  which  are  not  less  distinct  the  one  from  the 
other,  make  most  complete  and  satisfactory  explana- 
tion of  the  differences  of  Style  and  vocabulary  which 
have  so  often  been  pointed  out,  and  used  as  criteria 
for  parceling  out  the  Pentateuchal  materials  among 
different  documents  by  different  authors.  Thus  the 
facts,  th  mselves,  of  the  giving  and  use  of  the  laws  in 
the  Pentateuch,  the  giving  of  laws  to  meet  different 
KINDS  of  cases,  and  the  employment  of  these  laws  for 
very  different  USES,  when  carefully  examined,  fur- 
nish a  complete  solution  of  the  problems  of  Style  and 
vocabulary  which  the  Pentateuch  presents. 


Chapter  IV 

FOURTH  INVESTIGATION 

A  Comparison  of  the  Divisions  of  the  Pentateuch 

According  to  KINDS  and  USES  of  Laws  with 

THE  Divisions  According  to  the 

Documentary  Theory 

The  fourth  investigation  was  made  concerning  a 
comparison  between  the  divisions  into  which  the  ma- 
terials of  the  Pentateuch  fall  according  to  these  KINDS 
and  USES  of  laws  and  the  divisions  which  are  made 
according  to  the  Documentary  Theory. 

I.  The  Documentary  Theory  regards  Deuteronomy 
as  a  book  by  itself  among  the  Pentateuchal  material. 
The  other  books  of  the  Pentateuch  are  treated  as  com- 
pilations made  up  from  various  documents  and  joined 
together  by  various  Redactors,  and  so,  finally,  coming 
into  their  present  form  as  a  finished  product.  Deuter- 
onomy, on  the  other  hand,  is  regarded  as  an  entirely 
separate  piece  of  literature,  in  the  main  the  work  of 
one  author,  and,  perhaps  struck  off  at  one  time,  though 
on  this  latter  point  critics  differ  much  among  them- 
selves. It  is,  also,  held  by  all  that  use  was  made  of  the 
legislation  contained  in  Exodus  and  Numbers,  and,  by 
most  critics,  that  one  or  more  Redactors  have  had  a 
hand  in  bringing  Deuteronomy  into  its  present  form 
(Cf.  George  Adam  Smith's  Deuteronomy,  in  the  Cam- 

130 


FOURTH  INVESTIGATION  131 

bridge  Bible,  with,  also,  all  exponents  of  this  Docu- 
mentary view  of  the  Pentateuch).  Moreover  the  one 
author  and  one  time  of  the  composition  of  Deuteronomy 
is,  according  to  the  Theory,  entirely  apart  from  the 
various  authors  and  redactors  and  dates  of  the  other 
books  of  the  Pentateuch. 

The  analysis  of  the  Pentateuch  that  we  have  been 
making  in  these  investigations  has,  also,  found  Deuter- 
onomy to  be  a  book  that  is,  in  its  literary  form,  quite 
apart  from  the  other  books  of  the  Law.  While  the 
"commandments,"  "judgments"  and  "statutes"  are 
found  with  the  same  technical  significance  in  Deuter- 
onomy as  in  the  other  law  books,  the  literary  form  and 
setting  has  been  found  to  be  totally  different.  In  Exo- 
dus, Leviticus  and  Numbers,  all  the  various  KINDS 
of  laws  are  like  inserts  in  a  journalistic  narrative. 
They  could  be  dropped  out  entirely  and  the  journal  of 
events  would  constitute  a  complete  narrative,  as  com- 
plete, as  now,  and  more  consecutive.  In  Deuteronomy, 
on  the  other  hand,  the  laws  are  of  the  very  warp  and 
woof  of  Moses'  addresses,  and  the  addresses  them- 
selves so  combine  together  as  to  make  the  book  to  be, 
not  a  journal,  but  a  monograph. 

Now,  it  is  manifest  that  for  the  purposes  of  com- 
parison between  divisions  of  the  Pentateuch  afforded 
by  the  Documentary  Theory  and  divisions  according 
to  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws  the  common  basis  of 
comparison  which  logic  requires  is  to  be  found  in 
recognizing  the  monographic  character  of  Deuteron- 
omy in  distinction  from  the  journalistic  character  of 
Exodus,  Leviticus  and  Numbers,  and  so  allowing  it 
to  stand  apart  from  the  other  books  in  the  comparison, 
while  they  are  grouped  together.  The  groups  of  the 
various  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws  in  Deuteronomy 


132  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

would,  indeed,  show  the  same  characteristics,  but  there 
are  no  divisions  according  to  the  Documentary  Theory 
with  which  to  compare  them,  hence  no  common  basis 
of  comparison.  In  the  following  comparison,  there- 
fore. Exodus,  Leviticus  and  Numbers  will  be  grouped 
together  and  Deuteronomy  treated  separately,  as  is 
done  in  the  Documentary  Theory, 

We  have  already  seen  that  both  Form  and  Style  of 
the  groups  of  the  various  KINDS  of  laws,  "command- 
ments," "judgments"  and  "statutes"  in  their  various 
USES,  differ  greatly  from  each  other.  It  is  clearly 
then  to  be  expected  that,  if  the  groups  of  all  these 
various  KINDS  of  laws  in  Exodus,  Leviticus  and  Num- 
bers were  gathered  together  respectively  according  to 
their  KINDS  and  USES,  and  to  each  group  of  laws 
was  attached  the  narrative  portions  which  served  to 
introduce  them  or  explain  the  occasion  that  called  them 
forth  and  the  events  to  which  they  led  in  the  wilder- 
ness experiences,  that  the  resulting  divisions  of  the 
Pentateuch  will  exhibit,  also,  very  strikingly  the  same 
characteristics  of  Form  and  Style  as  the  various 
KINDS  and  USES  of  laws  according  to  which  these 
collections  have  been  made  from  the  books  of  the 
Pentateuch. 

II.  We  will  extract  these  collections  of  laws  and 
associated  narrative  from  the  complete  analysis  of  the 
materials  in  the  First  Investigation  and  see  what  they 
are  in  fact. 

COMMANDMENTS 

Ex.  XX:  1-17,  The  Decalogue.  Associated  narrative 
Ex.  XIX  and  XX :  18-21,  the  account  of  the  giv- 
ing of  the  Decalogue  and  of  the  accompanying 
events. 


FOURTH  INVESTIGATION  133 

JUDGMENTS 

Ex.  XXI  :1-XXIII  :19,  The  great  list  of  "judgments" 
given  at  Sinai. 

Ex.  XXIII  :31-33,  Brief  list  of  "judgments"  con- 
cerning the  occupation  of  the  Promised  Land 
which  at  that  time  was  looked  forward  to  im- 
mediately. Associated  narrative,  Ex.  XXIII: 
20-30,  being  exhortations  and  promises ;  XXIV : 
1-18,  narrative  of  the  Covenant  at  Sinai,  the 
presentation  of  the  priests  and  the  seventy- 
elders  before  the  Lord  and  the  calling  of  Moses 
into  the  mount  with  Jehovah  for  forty  days. 

Ex.  XXXIV  :18-21,  Short  list  of  "judgments"  con- 
cerning the  civil  law  of  some  of  the  Feasts,  con- 
cerning First  fruits,  and  concerning  the  keep- 
ing of  the  Sabbath. 

Lev.  XVIII  :3-26,  Sundry  "judgments"  mingled 
with  "statutes"  for  the  most  part  repetitions  of 
"judgments"  already  given.  Associated  narra- 
tive, Lev.  XVIII  :27-30,  indicating  that  these 
laws  were  given  at  this  point  in  special  prepara- 
tion for  entering  the  Promised  Land. 

Lev.  XIX:l-4,  11-18,  29-36,  Sundry  "judgments" 
mingled  in  the  list  with  "statutes."  Verse  37 
narrates  the  injunction  to  observe  all  the  "judg- 
ments" and  "statutes." 

Lev.  XX:9-16  and  27,  Various  "judgments"  for  the 
most  part  concerning  miscegenation  of  various 
kinds. 

Lev.  XXIV:10-XXV:55,  Brief  list  of  "judgments" 
and  mingled  narrative  arising  out  of  the  inci- 
dent of  the  son  of  an  Israelitish  woman  and  an 
Egyptian  man  who  blasphemed  the  name  of  the 


134  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

Lord.  Following  this  are  a  number  of  "judg- 
ments" concerning  the  Jubilee,  the  redemption 
of  Land,  the  treatment  of  bondmen. 

Lev.  XXVI  :l-2,  Certain  "judgments"  concerning 
idolatry  and  irreverence. 

Num.  XXXV:9-29,  "Statutes  of  judgment"  concern- 
ing Cities  of  Refuge,  which  are  special  statu- 
tory "judgments"  and  may  properly  be  included 
among  the  "judgments"  for  the  purpose  of  this 
comparison  of  divisions  in  the  Pentateuch. 

Num.  XXXV  :30-34,  "Judgments"  concerning  homi- 
cide which  are  appropriately  associated  with 
the  law  of  the  Cities  of  Refuge. 

STATUTES 

Ex.  XX:22-26,  Brief  group  of  "statutes"  of  ritual 
given  immediately  after  the  Decalogue  for  the 
direction  of  worship  before  the  giving  of  the 
Ceremonial  Law. 

Ex.  XXV:1-XXX:38,  Directions  for  the  construc- 
tion of  the  Tabernacle,  and  its  furniture,  for  the 
vestments  of  the  priests  and  for  the  setting 
apart  of  the  priests;  associated  narrative,  Ex. 
XXXII  :1-XXXIII:23,  recounting  the  events 
in  the  camp  of  Israel  while  Moses  was  on  the 
mount  receiving  instructions  concerning  the 
Tabernacle,  and  Moses'  return  and  prayer  for 
the  people  for  their  sin  of  worshipping  the 
golden  calf. 

Ex.  XXXIV  :19-26,  Brief  lists  of  "statutes,"  with 
associated  and  continuing  narrative  to  the  end 
of  the  book,  Ex.  XXXIV  :1-17  and  XXXIV  :27- 
XL  :38,  recounting  the  renewal  of  the  Tables  of 
the  Law,  the  gifts  of  the  people  for  the  Taber- 
nacle and  its  furnishing,  and  the  erection  of  the 


FOURTH  INVESTIGATION  135 

Tabernacle  and  the  making  of  all  the  things 
needed  for  it. 

Lev.  I-XVI,  "Statutes"  of  the  Ceremonial  Law. 

Lev.  XVII:1-16,  "Statutes"  of  the  Ceremonial  Law 
of  eating  flesh  with  the  blood. 

Lev.  XVIII:  1-17,  Concerning  unlawful  marriages. 

Lev.  XIX:5-10,  19-28,  Sacrifice  of  peace-offerings, 
and  sundry  "statutes."  Verse  20  is  a  "statute 
of  judgment." 

Lev.  XX:  1-8,  17-26,  Sundry  "statutes." 

Lev.  XXI:1-XXIV:9,  "Statutes"  concerning  many 
matters,  and  especially  the  Feasts. 

Lev.  XXVII:  1-34,  Laws  of  vows  and  their  redemp- 
tion, preceded  by  a  narrative  of  the  blessings 
and  the  curses.  Lev.  XXVI  :3-46. 

Num.  I-X:10,  "Statutes"  concerning  the  numbering 
of  the  people,  the  camp  of  the  tribes,  vows  and 
offerings,  the  passover,  and  the  silver  trumpets, 
associated  narrative  X:  11-36,  account  of  the 
setting  forward  on  the  way  from  Sinai  to  the 
Promised  Land. 

Num.  XV:1-31,  Law  of  sacrifice  for  sin  of  ignor- 
ance, narrative  XI:1-XIV:45,  a  narrative  of  the 
journeyings  on  the  way  toward  the  Promised 
Land,  the  sending  out  of  the  spies,  and  the  re- 
bellion of  the  people  and  Moses'  intercession  for 
them. 

Num.  XVIII  :1-XIX:22,  "Statutes"  of  the  portions 
of  the  Priests  and  Levites,  associated  narrative 
XV:32-XVII:13,  of  the  stoning  of  the  Sabbath 
breakers,  of  the  rebellion  of  Korah,  Dathan  and 
Abiram,  of  the  murmuring  of  the  people,  and 
of  Aaron's  rod  that  budded.  Also,  a  succeeding 
narrative,     XX:1-XXVI:65,     recounting     the 


136  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

events  of  the  thirty-eight  years  wandering,  the 
conflict  with  Balak  and  Baalam,  the  whoredom 
and  idolatry  with  Edom  and  the  numbering  of 
Israel  in  the  Plains  of  Moab. 

Num.  XXVII  :6-ll,  Law  of  the  inheritance  of  daugh- 
ters, a  "statute  of  judgment."  It  might  be 
listed  with  the  "judgments,"  also,  but  this 
"statute"  of  "judgment"  seems  more  a  "statute" 
than  a  "judgment."  There  is  also  associated 
narrative  XXVII:  1-5,  giving  account  of  the 
plea  made  for  the  daughters  of  Zelophehad. 

Num.  XXVIII  :1-XXX:  16,  Concerning  offerings 
and  feasts,  "statutes,"  narrative  XXVII:  12-23, 
the  command  to  Moses  to  view  the  Holy  Land, 
and  the  arrangement  for  a  successor  to  Moses, 

Num.  XXXIV:  1-29,  "statute,"  fixing  the  borders  of 
the  land,  narrative  XXXI:1-XXXIII:49.  Mid- 
ianites  spoiled,  Reuben  and  Gad  allotted  their 
inheritance  east  of  Jordan,  and  account  of  the 
two  and  forty  journeyings  of  Israel. 

Num.  XXXV:  1-8,  Law  of  the  cities  of  the  Levites. 

Num.  XXXV:9-29,  Law  of  the  cities  of  refuge,  a 
"statute  of  judgment,"  that  might  be,  also, 
classified  as  a  "judgment"  in  this  comparison, 
but  seems  also  more  a  "statute"  than  a  "judg- 
ment." 

Num.  XXXVI:  1-13,  Inheritance  of  daughters,  an- 
other "statute  of  judgment"  (Cf.  p.  60-61) 
which  seems  more  a  "statute"  than  a  "judg- 
ment" and  so  is  placed  here  for  this  comparison. 

If  again,  the  groups  of  Mnemonic,  Descriptive  and 
Hortatory  laws  were  gathered  together  respectively 
from  the  preceding  investigations,  together  with  nar- 
rative portions  which  serve  to  introduce  them  or  ex- 


FOURTH  INVESTIGATION  137 

plain  the  occasion  of  their  use,  we  would  expect  the 
resulting  divisions  to  display  in  large  degree  the  same 
characteristics  which  so  strongly  mark  these  different 
Literary  Forms  required  by  the  different  USES  for 
which  these  groups  of  laws  were  intended.  And  when 
we  actually  make  such  divisions  the  expected  char- 
acteristics are  clearly  apparent.  Moreover,  the  sets  of 
divisions  thus  resulting  from  gathering  together  the 
groups  of  laws  according  to  KINDS,  with  associated 
narrative  and  the  groups  of  laws  according  to  USES 
with  accompanying  narrative,  are  exactly  the  same. 
The  "commandments"  and  "judgments"  are  the  Mne- 
monic laws,  the  "statutes"  are  the  Descriptive  laws, 
and  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy,  which  stands  by  itself, 
contains  the  Hortatory  presentation  of  all  the  three 
kinds  of  laws.  Of  course,  as  the  divisions  are  the  same, 
the  same  narrative  serves  to  introduce  and  explain  the 
groups  of  laws  according  to  the  division  in  either  case. 

III.  It  is  well  known  that  the  Documentary  Hypo- 
thesis also  presents  certain  divisions  of  the  Pentateuch. 
These  various  divisions  and  the  reasons  assigned  for 
making  them  are  best  examined  in  detail  in  the  writ- 
ings of  those  who  are  the  principal  advocates  of  the 
Documentary  Theory.  The  subject  may  be  seen  so 
presented  in  Wellhausen's  Prolegomena,  Kautzsch's 
Literature  of  the  Old  Testament,  Haupt's  Polychrome 
Bible,  and  in  the  Oxford  Hexateuch.  I  will  give  here 
only  a  few  brief  statements  of  the  Divisions  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch according  to  the  Documentary  Theory,  which 
any  one  may  test  by  reference  to  the  works  just  cited. 

According  to  the  Documentary  Hypothesis,  there  are 
certain  main  Documents  as  follows :  First  among  these 
Documents,  because  esteemed  the  oldest  of  them  all,  is 
the  J  Document,  whose  author  is  known  as  the  Jahvist, 


138  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

because  he  used  almost  exclusively  the  name  Jehovah 
in  speaking  of  God.     Another  Document  is  called  the 
E  Document,  whose  author  is  called  the  Elohist,  be- 
cause he  refers  to  the  Deity  almost  exclusively  by  the 
Hebrew  name  Elohim.     These  two  very  early  Docu- 
ments were  later  combined,   according  to  the  hypo- 
thesis, into  one  Document,  called,  for  convenience,  the 
JE  Document.     It  is  in  this  combined  Document,  ac- 
cording to  the  theory,  that  the  two  authors,  J  and  E, 
appear,  for  the  most  part,  in  the  Bible  as  we  have  it. 
A  few  fragments  only  of  the  original  J  and  E  docu- 
ments are  pointed  out.     A  second  main  Document  ap- 
pearing in  the  Bible  in  its  present  form,  according  to 
this  Documentary  Hypothesis,  is  the  P  Document,  the 
Priestly  writing,  so  called,  because  its  author  is  sup- 
posed to  have  been  a  priest  or  a  company  of  priests. 
Finally,  there  is  the  D  Document,  which  is  the  Book 
of  Deuteronomy,  and  its  author  is  called  the  Deuter- 
onomist.    There  are,  also,  a  number  of  smaller  Docu- 
ments pointed  out  by  various  advocates  of  the  Docu- 
mentary theory.     Indeed,  one  who  accepts  the  theory 
is  apt  to  acquire  a  Documentary  habit  that  impels  to 
ever  increasing  exercise.     Then,  there  is  also,  a  con- 
siderable element,  not  a  document,  contributed  by  a 
Redactor  or  by  Redactors,  various  editors,  who  from 
time  to  time  had  to  do  with  the  publication  of  the 
sacred  writings  of  the  Hebrews.    This  last  element  is 
denominated  R.     In  making  comparison  between  the 
divisions  of  the  Pentateuch  afforded  by  these  present 
investigations   and   those    divisions   afforded   by   the 
Documentary  Theory,  it  will  prove  entirely  satisfac- 
tory to  all  that  the  comparison  be  limited  to  the  Main 
Documents  of  the   Documentary   Theory;  the  minor 
Documents  are  so  brief  as  not  to  affect  the  general 


FOURTH  INVESTIGATION  139 

results  of  the  comparison,  and  the  element  supplied 
by  the  Redactor  serves  simply  to  combine  together 
what  are  claimed  to  be  the  real  Documents. 

Comparison  will  then  be  made  with  the  JE  Docu- 
ment, including  with  it  such  fragments  of  J  and  E  as 
are  still  pointed  out;  the  P  Document,  including  H, 
the  so-called  Holiness  Code,  incorporated  with  it;  and 
the  D  Document.  While  naturally,  all  critics  do  not 
wholly  agree  in  the  assignment  of  passages  to  the 
various  Documents,  the  disagreement  is  sometimes 
quite  overestimated.  There  is,  indeed,  quite  general 
agreement  concerning  the  main  portions  of  the  Penta- 
teuch. In  this  comparison,  we  will  follow  the  divisions 
as  given  by  Kautzsch  in  the  Literature  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment (Cf.  p.  226),  and  as  shown  to  the  eye  in  the 
Polychrome  Bible  edited  by  Professor  Haupt.  Nearly 
the  same  results  would  be  found  by  consulting  any 
other  work  founded  on  the  Documentary  Theory. 

According  to  this  analysis  of  the  Pentateuch,  there 
is  assigned  to  the  JE  Decument,  including  the  frag- 
ments still  assigned  to  J  and  E,  the  Book  of  Exodus, 
except  Chapters  XXV-XL,  portions  of  the  book  of 
Numbers  amounting  to  about  one-half,  and  portions 
of  Leviticus,  especially  of  the  Holiness  Code.  There 
is  assigned  to  the  P  Document  almost  the  whole  of 
Leviticus  (except  portions  of  H  assigned  to  JE),  chap- 
ters XXV-XL  of  the  book  of  Exodus,  and  nearly  all 
of  the  remainder  of  the  book  of  Numbers  not  assigned 
to  JE  and  to  J  and  E.  The  D  Document  is  the  book 
of  Deuteronomy  almost  in  its  entirety.  Only  chapter 
XXXni  and  a  few  scattered  fragments  are  given  other 
assignment. 

It  only  remains  to  compare  these  divisions  of  the 
Pentateuch  according  to  the  Documentary  Hypothesis 


140  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

with  the  divisions  afforded  by  the  different  KINDS 
and  USES  of  laws  as  developed  in  the  preceding  in- 
vestigations. A  glance  at  the  preceding  list  of  groups 
of  laws  will  suffice  to  show  the  results  of  the  com- 
parison. These  two  sets  of  divisions  are  almost  ex- 
actly identical.  There  is  a  margin  of  uncertainty  in 
the  assignment  of  difficult  passages  by  either  process 
of  division,  and  a  few  mistakes  may  be  made  in  either 
case.  No  more  disagreement  than  this  is  found  to 
exist.  The  accompanying  Diagram  on  the  opposite 
page  shows  the  main  divisions  afforded  by  these  two 
methods,  the  divisions  according  to  the  Documentary 
Theory  being  placed  above  and  the  divisions  according 
to  the  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws  below.  The  extent 
of  the  agreement  is  indicated  by  the  diagrammatic 
scheme,  agreement  by  dashes,  disagreements  by  dots; 
divided  agreement,  i.e.  agreement  in  part,  or  possible 
agreement  and  possible  disagreement,  by  both  dashes 
and  dots.  It  is  usual  with  advocates  of  the  Docu- 
mentary Theory  to  speak  in  a  general  way  of  Leviticus 
as  wholly  P  (Cf.  Kautzsch,  Literature  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment), but  in  detailed  discussions  of  the  material  it 
comes  out  that  H,  i.e.  Chaps.  XVII-XXVI,  is  said  to 
have  been  incorporated  from  some  older  legislation 
and,  in  the  ultimate  analysis,  is  divided  into  two 
original  sources.  Upon  examination  of  these  two 
"sources"  it  is  found  that  they  contain  respectively 
"judgments"  and  "statutes."  Thus  these  Chaps.  XVII- 
XXVI  are  in  the  Diagram  indicated  as  "divided  agree- 
ment." 

IV.  The  results  of  the  comparison  are  so  plain  that 
a  cursory  glance  at  the  Diagram  will  perceive: 

(1)  That  the  JE  Document,  together  with  scat- 
tered fragments  assigned  to  J  and  E,  is  made  up  very 


w 

^ 

Vt 

3- 

(t 

u» 

^ 

:r 

1 

•1 

rt 

o 

:i 

3 

P^ 

;l 

M 

1 

z 

:F 

:i 

K 

1 

1 

p 
3 

•1 

^■^ 

o 

p 

1 

cr 

:i 

t- 

p: 

. «« 

8- 

i  1 

0 

jl 

< 

IS 

1 

t» 

LLr 

:l 

f* 

1 

v» 

'^u^l 

;i^ 

o 

1 

Ja 

1 

P 

^ 

^la 

K 

w 

^ 

CD 

1 

H 

1 

1 

1 

^y 

1 

R 

1 

^ 

Is 

^ 

1- 

^ 

^ 

P 

r»- 

(^u 

1> 

A 

•-{ 

P- 

O 

> 

3 

1 

•1 

In 

0 

3 

a 

^f  - 

^ 

H 

*D 

3 

o 

3 

H« 

o 

1 

? 

:F 

m 

w 

X 
0 

<n 

1 

3 

:l 

ii'^ 

p- 

1 

cr 

:| 

r* 

\* 

c 

« 

Pb, 

1 

:l 
;| 

0) 

< 

1 

1) 
o 

f 

:| 

1 

►1 

•.^ 

n 

1 

•-<• 

'     1 

p 

Iste 

m 

ti 

< 

n 

1 

t- 

P> 

1 

% 

1 

v» 

1 
|5 

3: 

r 

0 

ti 

♦^ 

rt- 

«+ 

n> 

0 

•i 

»< 

0 

*< 

3 

r 

0 

3 

1 

z         i^ 

"< 

v> 

Is 

142  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

exactly  of  the  "Commandments"  and  the  "judgments" 
found  in  Exodus,  Leviticus  and  Numbers,  almost  wholly 
Mnemonic  laws,  with  the  addition  of  those  narrative 
portions  necessary  to  introduce  and  explain  these  col- 
lections of  laws.  The  P  Document  is  almost  exactly 
the  "statutes"  of  Exodus,  Leviticus  and  Numbers,  al- 
most wholly  Descriptive  laws,  with  the  addition  here, 
also,  of  the  narrative  portions  belonging  with  these 
"statutes."  The  D  Document  contains,  with  almost 
perfect  exactness,  the  Hortatory  expression  of  the 
"commandments,"  "judgments"  and  "statutes"  in  the 
book  of  Deuteronomy,  and  the  binding  thread  of  nar- 
rative that  makes  Deuteronomy  such  a  graphic  book. 
To  the  complete  agreement  indicated  by  this  compari- 
son of  the  divisions  according  to  the  Documentary 
Hypothesis  and  the  divisions  afforded  by  these  in- 
vestigations there  is  but  a  single  real  exception,  the 
XXXni  chapter  of  Deuteronomy,  assigned  by  the 
Documentary  Theory  to  some  late  author. 

(2)  These  various  investigations  and  this  strik- 
ing comparison  with  the  Documentary  Theory  to  which 
they  lead  do  not  directly  disprove  the  Documentary 
Theory.  They  are  not,  indeed,  directed  immediately 
to  that  end.  It  is  not  so  important  to  disprove  any  oi 
the  theories  of  the  composition  of  the  Pentateuch  as 
it  is  to  present  a  correct  solution  of  the  literary  prob- 
lems of  Form,  Style  and  Vocabulary  in  the  Pentateuch. 
I  do  not  mean  to  belittle  the  efforts  of  those  who  have 
spent  much  time  and  great  learning  in  attempts  to 
disprove  the  Documentary  Theory:  their  efforts  are 
well  directed,  if  they  should  prove  successful.  But 
merely  to  disprove  the  Documentary  Theory  would  not 
get  us  on  very  far ;  for  that  would  leave  the  real  Penta- 
teuchal  Problem  of  Form  and  Style  and  Vocabulary 


FOURTH  INVESTIGATION  143 

still  unsolved.  The  original  purpose  of  these  investiga- 
tions was  purely  analytical,  simply  to  discover  what 
would  be  revealed  by  the  classifying  of  the  "materials 
of  the  Law."  The  immediate  purpose  of  the  publica- 
tion now  is  not  to  disprove  any  theory,  but  to  present 
that  solution  of  the  Pentateuchal  Problem  which  these 
investigations  have  brought  to  light. 

So  I  say  with  all  frankness  that  these  investigations 
do  not  directly  disprove  the  Documentary  Theory  and 
are  not  directed  to  that  end.  But  they  do  far  more. 
They  present  only  patent  facts  which  any  one  can 
examine  and  verify  for  himself  and  which  every 
doubter  is  challenged  so  to  test ;  yet  these  facts  afford 
equally  as  good  and  complete  explanation  of  the 
literary  phenomena  of  Form  and  Style  and  Vocabulary 
in  the  Pentateuch  as  does  the  Documentary  Theory. 
Thus  it  appears  that  there  is  something  else  besides 
that  Theory  which  satisfactorily  meets  the  require- 
ments of  these  literary  Phenomena  of  the  Pentateuch. 
Moreover,  this  it  does  without  calling  in  the  aid  of  any 
suppositional  elements,  as  unknown  authors  and  un- 
mentioned  documents.  It  is  a  fundamental  principle  of 
the  examining  and  interpreting  of  evidence  that  noth- 
ing is  to  be  supposed,  if  the  case  is  made  complete  by  the 
known  evidence  without  any  supposition.  These  in- 
vestigations show  that  the  case  for  the  differences  of 
Form  and  Style  and  Vocabulary  in  the  Pentateuch  is 
complete  without  any  suppositional  element.  It  is,  of 
course,  admitted  that  no  theory  or  explanation  in  life 
and  literature,  which  are  never  mechanical  but  always 
subject  to  the  caprices  of  human  volition,  is  ever 
proved  simply  by  the  fact  that  it  works;  hut  an  ex- 
planation that  works  without  calling  in  the  aid  of  any 
suppositional  element  without  which  it  is  inadequate, 


144  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

is  more  probable  than  one  that  invokes  such  aid. 
Common  sense  does  not  take  kindly  to  suppositions, 
when  none  are  needed.  Thus,  in  the  presence  of  the 
evidence  afforded  by  the  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws, 
indirectly  the  Documentary  Theory,  with  its  supposi- 
tions of  unknown  authors  and  un-heard-of  documents 
as  an  explanation  of  the  peculiarities  of  Form  and 
Style  and  Vocabulary  in  the  Pentateuch,  is  ruled  out 
by  the  laws  of  evidence. 


''  Chapter  V 

FIFTH  INVESTIGATION 

Harmoniousness  of  Style  and  Diction  in  the 

Divisions  of  the  Pentateuch  According 

TO  KINDS  AND  USES  OF  Laws 

Another  investigation  is  at  once  naturally  demanded 
at  this  point,  an  enquiry  into  the  harmoniousness  of 
Style  and  Diction  of  the  various  divisions  of  the  Penta- 
teuch according  to  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws.  Are 
these  different  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws  and  the  dif- 
ferent authors  which  appear  in  the  "commandments" 
and  "judgments"  and  "statutes"  and  the  accompany- 
ing narrative  sufficient  to  account  for  the  differences 
of  Style  and  Vocabulary  which  appear  in  the  Penta- 
teuch or  do  elements  appear  for  which  these  will  not 
account? 

The  only  complete  and  satisfactory  answer  to  this 
question  is  to  be  found  by  enquiring  into  the  general 
literary  question  of  Style  and  Vocabulary,  into  the  ac- 
tual differences  of  Style  and  Vocabulary  which  exist 
in  these  various  divisions  afforded  by  the  application 
of  this  solution  of  the  Pentateuchal  Problem,  and  into 
the  relation  of  these  differences  of  Style  and  Vocabu- 
lary to  these  various  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws  and 
the  various  authors  concerned  in  producing  the  Penta- 
teuch. 

145 


146  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

I.  It  is  urged,  and  perhaps  properly,  that  it  is  at 
this  point  that  the  crucial  questions  are  raised,  and 
that  the  correctness  of  the  solution  proposed  in  this 
book  depends  upon  the  answer  given  to  the  above  en- 
quiry. To  what  extent  ought  Style  and  Vocabulary  to 
be  harmonious  throughout  these  various  divisions  of 
the  Pentateuch  here  presented,  and,  are  they  har- 
monious to  that  extent? 

"Judgments"  being  for  the  most  part,  as  we  have 
seen,  "judgings,"  decisions  of  judges,  written  down 
at  last  in  the  form  into  which  long  usage  has  brought 
them  are  not  thus  to  be  in  the  Style  of  the  narrative 
which  represents  the  Style  and  Vocabulary  of  the  nar- 
rator. "Commandments,"  also,  were  given  by  the  voice 
of  God  and  received,  also,  from  God  for  a  written  form 
so  that  like  the  "judgments,"  they  do  not  represent  the 
Style  and  Vocabulary  of  the  narrator.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  "statutes,"  on  the  representations  of  the  ac- 
count itself,  were  given  to  Moses  and  were  written 
down  by  the  narrator,  whoever  that  was.  Thus  the 
narrative  produced  by  him  may  be  expected  to  show 
something  of  the  same  Style,  though  the  peculiarities 
demanded  by  the  technical  character  of  the  "statutes" 
may  not  reasonably  be  expected  to  be  reflected  in  any 
great  degree  in  the  narrative  portions,  which  naturally 
contain  little  or  nothing  of  the  use  of  the  technical 
terms  found  in  the  "statutes."  These  things  we  have 
a  right  on  a  jmori  grounds  to  expect,  according  to  the 
Pentateuch  itself,  in  the  examination  of  the  question 
of  harmoniousness  of  Style  and  Diction  in  the  various 
divisions  of  the  Pentateuch  according  to  KINDS  and 
USES  of  laws.  If  it  does  not  prove  so,  then  it  would 
seem  that  the  principle  of  divison  adopted  according 
to  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws  is  fallacious.    Thus  this 


FIFTH    INVESTIGATION  147 

question  of  homogeniousness  becomes  not  only  a  crucial 
question  at  this  point,  but  is  crucial  for  the  whole  pro- 
posed solution  of  the  Pentateuchal  Problem.  If  it  fail, 
i.e.  if  it  does  not  show  such  degree  of  harmoniousness 
as  there  ought  to  be  under  the  circumstances,  the  whole 
solution  fails.  If  it  stands  this  test,  then,  to  the  same 
extent,  the  trustworthiness  of  the  solution  is  estab- 
lished. 

Recognizing  the  importance  of  meeting  these  de- 
mands in  order  to  convince  any  not  yet  entirely  con- 
vinced of  the  correctness  of  this  solution  of  the  Penta- 
teuchal Problem,  I  will  do  my  best  to  satisfy  every  one 
at  this  point,  even  though  it  does  require  a  long  literary 
discussion  of  the  principles  of  rhetoric.  Yet  I  feel 
obliged  to  call  attention,  first,  to  the  fact  that  the  sub- 
jective test  is  not  the  deciding  test  of  the  correctness 
of  this  solution  of  the  Pentateuchal  Problem,  or  in 
fact  the  solution  of  any  problem.  A  correct  solution 
is  correct  whether  a  particular  person,  or  persons  see 
it  to  be  correct  or  not.  If  the  Documentary  Theory 
be  the  correct  solution  of  the  Pentateuchal  Problem, 
it  is  so,  whether  I  can  see  that  it  sufficiently  accounts 
for  the  differences  of  Form  and  Style  and  Vocabulary 
or  not.  My  inability  to  see  it  does  not  affect  it  in  the 
least.  And  if  this  proposed  solution  of  the  Penta- 
teuchal Problem  be  correct,  it  is  so,  whether  those  who 
hold  to  the  Documentary  Theory  see  it  or  not.  The 
correctness  of  a  solution  is  an  objective  truth,  not  a 
subjective  state  of  mind.  So,  I  do  not  quite  agree  that 
the  crucial  test  of  this  solution  is  to  show  to  every- 
body's satisfaction  that  it  sufficiently  accounts  for 
differences  of  Form  and  Style  and  Vocabulary,  but  it 
is  of  such  importance  to  do  so,  if  possible,  that  I  will 
make  the  attempt. 


14.8  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

II.  At  the  very  outset  of  this  examination  of  Style 
and  Diction  we  are  confronted  with  a  fact  that  may 
seem  to  some  to  render  the  examination  wholly  un- 
necessary. As  the  divisions  afforded  by  this  investiga- 
tion are  substantially  the  same  as  those  made  accord- 
ing to  the  Documentary  Theory,  the  Style  and  Diction 
throughout  each  division  must  be  substantially  the 
same  also.  Thus  everything  that  has  been  said  on  this 
subject  in  the  interests  of  the  Documentary  Theory  is 
at  once  available  for  these  divisions,  also.  This  does 
not,  however,  end  the  matter  for  us. 

It  is  in  order  to  enquire  whether  or  not  evidence 
for  differences  in  Style  and  Diction  in  the  various 
Documents  by  the  Documentary  Theory  are  sufficient, 
whether  or  not,  also,  these  very  different  criteria  for 
divisions,  to  which  attention  is  now  directed,  may  lead 
to  the  discovery  of  additional  elements  that  distinguish 
them  in  Style  and  Diction.  The  whole  question  of  the 
significance  and  interpretation  of  Style  and  Diction 
for  the  purposes  of  literary  criticism  to  determine 
unity,  authorship  and  date,  also,  demands  considera- 
tion. Much  has  been  written  upon  this  subject  by 
many  distinguished  literary  critics,  but  it  is  important 
that  the  subject  receive  consideration  in  consonance 
with  these  investigations  so  as  to  meet  all  their  re- 
quirements. It  is  seldom  that  any  view  of  a  subject 
in  a  given  direction  is  available  for  a  view  of  the  sub- 
ject in  a  very  different  direction,  even  though  it  be 
from  the  same  view-point.  This  is  as  true  of  views 
of  truth  as  of  views  of  landscape. 

III.  Any  adequate  consideration  of  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  significance  of  the  Style  and  Diction  for 
the  purposes  of  Literary  Criticism  must  include  four 
things:  (1)  The  Elements,  (2)  The  Sources,  (3)  The 


FIFTH    INVESTIGATION  149 

Laws  of  Interpretation,  (4)  The  Value  of  the  Results 
of  Interpretation. 

1.  The  Elements  of  Style  and  Diction. 

At  the  last  analysis,  style  and  diction  may  be  re- 
duced to  words  and  their  arrangement.  This  seems 
very  simple,  and  style  and  diction  would  thus  seem  to 
be  easily  and  unerringly  determinable.  In  fact,  it  is 
far  otherwise.  For,  while  style  and  diction  consist  of 
words  and  their  arrangement,  the  choice  of  words  and 
the  arrangement  of  words  involves  the  almost  infinite 
possibilities  of  variation  in  expression,  and  introduces 
that  most  elusive  of  all  factors,  the  personal  equation. 
It  is  in  these  varieties  of  expression  and  the  vagaries 
and  caprices  of  the  personal  equation  in  the  one  who 
uses  them  that  originate  all  the  graces  of  adornment, 
as  well  as  the  crudities  and  incongruities  of  authors; 
in  short,  all  the  literary  skill  and  all  the  peculiarities 
and  idiosyncracies  which  differentiate  the  works  of 
one  author  from  those  of  another,  and,  indeed,  give 
rise  to  the  question  of  style  and  diction.  Without  these 
variations  caused  by  the  personal  equation,  every  piece 
of  writing  in  any  given  language  would  be  like  every 
other  piece,  literature  would  be  shorn  of  its  greatest 
attractions  and  reduced  to  the  dead  level  of  a  worse 
monotony  than  Volapuk  or  Esperanto. 

So  it  is  the  peculiarities  which  the  personality  of 
the  author  introduces  into  literature  that  we  are  called 
upon  to  study  and  depict  in  any  analysis  of  style  and 
diction.  Moreover,  the  analysis  sought  is  not  so  much 
an  analysis  of  results  as  of  processes.  The  question  is 
not  so  much  what  peculiarities  does  an  author  pro- 
duce, an  enquiry  which  is  easily  answered,  as  how 
and  why  does  he  produce  them,  which  is  a  much  more 


150  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

difficult  question.  We  can  only  know  an  author  by 
studying  him  at  work. 

(a)   Words. 

Among  the  elements  of  style  and  diction,  let 
us  first  consider  Words.  The  individual  has  knowledge 
of  words,  preferences  among  words,  and  habits  in  the 
use  of  words.  He  knows,  ofttimes,  a  vast  number  of 
words  which  he  does  not  use  in  any  one  piece  of  com- 
position, often,  indeed,  not  in  all  his  writings.  Any 
one  may  discover  this  in  his  own  case  by  reading  a 
few  pages  of  an  unabridged  dictionary  and  observing 
how  many  words  there  are  in  it  which  he  understands, 
but  never  uses. 

The  individual  has  also  preferences  among  words 
which  he  knows  and  uses,  certain  words  and  phrases 
which  he  continually  chooses  to  use  rather  than  others 
which  he  knows  and  which  would  serve  his  purpose 
just  as  well.  These  preferences  vary,  also,  greatly 
according  to  the  subject  and  the  temperamental  at- 
titude of  the  writer  at  any  given  time.  If  he  writes 
sympathetically  on  a  subject,  he  prefers  one  set  of 
words,  but,  if  he  writes  unsympathetically,  a  very 
different  set  of  words  in  writing  ofttimes  about  the 
very  same  things.  Here  comes  in  the  wide  variation 
afforded  in  the  choice  of  synonyms. 

Then,  the  individual  has  habits  in  words,  originally 
preferences,  which  he  has  preferred  so  often  that  they 
have  become  habitual  preferences,  have  passed  over 
from  the  conscious  to  a  subconscious  use.  These 
habits  in  the  use  of  words  furnish  us  with  the  so- 
called  marks  of  an  author's  vocabulary.  If  these  habits 
never  gave  way  to  conscious  preferences,  the  solution 
of  the  problem  of  authorship  would  be  very  easy.  Thus, 
considering  these  preferences  and  habits,  an  author's 


FIFTH   INVESTIGATION  151 

vocabulary  is  not  a  fixed  and  accurately  determinable 
thing,  but  an  exceedingly  variable  quantity,  sometimes 
quite  indefinable.  Yet  every  author,  when  he  is  him- 
self and  not,  for  some  reason,  negativing  his  subcon- 
scious use  of  words,  has  a  vocabulary  which  is  dis- 
cernible. Especially  is  this  so  in  the  choice  of  syno- 
nyms and  of  negatives  and  enclitics,  and  in  the  select- 
ing of  uses  of  words  that  have  various  uses.  So  it  is 
that  style  has  much  to  do  with  vocabulary.  Style  and 
vocabulary  are  two  things,  and  logically,  may  be  and, 
indeed,  must  be,  considered  apart  from  each  other; 
yet  they  constitute  one  thing,  literature,  and  physically 
they  cannot  be  torn  apart.  Words  are  all  of  vocabulary ; 
they  constitute  but  one  element  of  style.  That  subtle, 
almost  indefinable  quality  of  good  literature  denom- 
inated a  good  style  consists  almost  as  much  in  the 
choice  of  words  as  in  the  arrangement  of  words. 

(b)  Phrases. 

Phrases  constitute  the  connecting  bridge  between 
vocabulary  and  style.  In  composition,  phrases  depend 
wholly  upon  the  author's  vocabulary ;  in  form  and  fre- 
quency and  uniformity  they  begin  to  give  distinctness 
to  style.  At  the  same  time,  the  use  of  phrases  intro- 
duces the  most  variable  element  into  both  style  and 
diction.  The  use  of  known  phrases,  like  the  use  of 
known  figures  of  speech,  is  one  of  the  necessary  ele- 
ments of  human  speech.  These  two  elements,  phrases 
and  figures  of  speech  constitute  a  people's  "way  of 
saying  things,"  which  makes  conversation  possible. 
If  every  one  had  to  originate  all  his  phrases  and  figures 
of  speech,  in  everything  he  said  or  wrote,  no  conversa- 
tion or  correspondence  could  ever  be  finished.  No  one 
could  understand  another  without  a  most  elaborate 
and  plodding  study  of  each  utterance.     Thus  all  per- 


152  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

sons  necessarily  choose  among  well-known  phrases 
those  which  they  are  accustomed  to  use  frequently; 
and  so,  on  the  one  hand,  phrases  become  very  helpful 
and  reliable  marks  of  authorship. 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  phrase-making,  the  striking 
out  for  one's  self  of  an  unusual  number  of  phrases 
that  really  are  new  to  the  author,  a  literary  method 
greatly  indulged  in  by  many  writers,  and  a  habit  of 
language  that  is  considered  a  virtue  in  some  languages, 
introduces  such  novelty  and  obscurity  of  style  as  often 
destroys  the  marks  of  authorship,  and  at  other  times, 
when  carried  to  a  great  extreme,  becomes  in  turn,  it- 
self, a  mark  of  authorship.  This  is  especially  true 
of  such  a  novelist  as  Dickens  or  such  a  humorist  as 
Mark  Twain. 

(c)   Arrangement  and  use  of  words. 

Style  adds  to  words  the  arrangement  and  use  of 
words,  not  merely  the  order  of  words  in  sentences 
and  paragraphs,  which  does,  indeed,  afford  striking 
elements  of  style,  but,  also,  adds  to  words  the  figurative 
use  of  words,  certain  qualities  of  style  which  each 
author  selects  intentionally  (as  in  the  case  of  experi- 
enced authors)  or  unintentionally  (as  in  the  case  of 
writers  of  less  experience)  from  all  the  possibilities 
which  the  language  affords.  Here  again  the  selection 
of  particular  qualities  of  rhetorical  style  may  result 
in  habits  which  become  marks  of  the  author's  style. 
In  some  periods  of  literature  there  are  fashions  in 
these  habits.  One  hundred  years  ago  it  was  the 
fashion  in  English  literature  to  write  with  great  even- 
ness of  style,  and  authorship  became  a  fixed  quantity 
easily  discernible.  At  the  present  time  the  fashion  is 
rather  to  break  up  subconscious  habits  in  rhetorical 
qualities  of  literature  and  consciously  to  strike  out 


FIFTH   INVESTIGATION  153 

continually  new  rhetorical  forms.  This  destroys  marks 
of  authorship  until  it  is,  also,  carried  to  the  extreme 
of  becoming  itself  a  habit  and  so  a  new  mark  of 
authorship. 

In  the  use  of  figures  of  speech,  there  is  usually  dis- 
cernible a  tendency  toward  the  use  of  some  particular 
kind  of  figure.  One  has  a  marked  preference  for 
metaphor;  another,  less  sententious  in  expression,  tar- 
ries to  unfold  metaphor  into  the  more  deliberate  and 
and  elaborate  simile;  another  with  imagination  more 
inclined  to  soar  has  a  fondness  for  the  visions  of 
allegory,  while  still  another  breaks  through  the  visions 
of  the  allegorist  and  boldly  goes  on  to  personification. 
These  tendencies  are  quite  the  most  inveterate  in  liter- 
ary style  and  thus  the  figure  of  speech  is  that  element 
of  style  and  diction  which,  more  than  any  other,  be- 
comes a  real  mark  of  authorship.  If  there  be  a  suffi- 
cient amount  of  the  literary  production  of  an  author 
available  for  examination  and  it  cover  a  wide  range 
of  subject  and  occasion,  these  characteristics  of  his 
style  that  are  reliable  may  be  determined  with  great 
accuracy. 

(d)   Rhetorical  methods. 

In  rhetorical  methods,  next  to  figures  of  speech, 
the  most  dependable  marks  of  style  will  appear.  One 
has  a  style  that  is  merely  suggestive,  ideas  are  often 
but  partially  stated;  another  never  leaves  a  thought 
unexpressed,  but  rather  draws  in  every  one  that  even 
floats  by.  One  is  satirical  and  given  to  insinuating 
questions ;  another  is  most  frank,  presents  everything 
in  simple,  categorical  statements,  one  is  given  to  bind- 
ing all  thought  closely  together  and  often  connects  a 
succeeding  sentence  with  the  preceding  one  either  by 
using  again  a  key  word,  or  some  reference  to  it,  or  the 


154  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

employment  of  a  connective ;  another  adds  one  sentence 
to  another  without  connective  of  any  kind  and  with 
such  distinct  clarity  as  that  almost  any  sentence  may 
be  lifted  out  of  its  connection  and  made  to  stand  by 
itself.  One  is  given  to  extravagence  and  hyperbole  of 
statement;  another  to  the  sharpest  definition  of 
thought.  One  has  a  fondness  for  detail ;  another  only 
for  great  outstanding  facts  and  ideas.  One  has  a 
strong  sense  of  humor  and  a  vivid  imagination ;  an- 
other is  most  matter-of-fact  in  both  thought  and 
language.  One  is  fond  of  short  and  sometimes  in- 
verted sentences;  another  glories  in  long,  elaborate, 
and  orderly  periods. 

Thus  style,  like  vocabulary,  is  not  always  a  deter- 
minable thing.  Yet,  despite  all  these  elements  of  un- 
certainty, there  are  distinct  differences  of  style  be- 
tween authors  which  may  be  detected.  Each  author 
of  experience  has  truly  a  style,  when  he  is  himself,  a 
style  that  is  discernible,  a  literary  countenance 
recognizable  by  those  who  know  him. 

2.  Sources. 

The  sources  of  style  and  diction  are  not  related  to 
the  elements  as  a  tree  to  its  fruits.  If  they  were,  each 
element  could  then  be  traced  unerringly  to  its  source, 
the  tree  which  bears  it.  The  different  elements  of 
style  and  diction  come  sometimes  from  one  source  and 
sometimes  from  another.  The  sources  and  elements 
are  related  rather  as  is  a  musician  to  his  music.  The 
varied  elements  of  his  melody  may  proceed  now  from 
one  source,  now  from  another ;  at  one  time,  it  is  his  own 
heart  that  sings,  at  another  some  subject  calls  forth 
its  own  appropriate  expression,  at  another,  a  great  oc- 
casion stirs  him  with  its  opportunity,  and,  at  still  an- 
other, his  music  is  colored  by  the  instrument  upon 


FIFTH    INVESTIGATION  155 

which  he  plays  which  gives  variety  to  his  song  from 
the  martial  stirring  of  the  fife  to  the  plaintive  sighing 
of  the  violin  or  the  soothing  tones  of  the  flute.  So 
are  style  and  diction  affected  by  the  sources  from 
which  they  proceed;  now  it  is  wholly  the  author  him- 
self to  which  his  words  give  expression,  now  his  sub- 
ject holds  the  mastery  of  his  emotions,  and  so  masters 
the  man,  now  he  rises  to  a  great  occasion  or  is  over- 
whelmed and  sinks  under  it,  and  again  he  pursues  his 
labors  methodically  surrounded  by  helpers  and  leaves 
the  last  shaping  of  his  sentences  to  an  amanuensis,  or 
editor,  or  proof-reader. 

(a)   Authorship. 

The  first  place  among  sources  of  style  and  diction 
must  undoubtedly  be  assigned  to  authorship.  What- 
ever other  source  precedes,  that  which  proceeds  from 
them  must  all  pass  this  point  and  receive  impress  here, 
as  well  as  sometimes  afterward  pass  through  other 
hands  and  receive  impress  of  another  medium  before 
publication.  To  what  extent  authorship  is  an  original 
source  of  style  and  diction  and  to  what  extent  only  a 
point  of  transit  is  one  of  the  principal  complexities  of 
the  subject.  Yet  some  have  treated  authorship  as 
though  it  were  almost  the  only  source  of  style  and 
diction,  as  though  all  other  sources  were  in  most  cases 
negligible  quantities. 

Undoubtedly  authorship  has  very  much  to  do  with 
style  and  diction ;  usually  it  has  more  to  do  with  it  than 
any  other  source,  and  is  never  entirely  submerged  by 
other  influences  that  become  sources.  Occasionally 
authorship  has  more  to  do  with  style  and  diction  than 
all  other  sources,  for  some  authors  scarcely  vary  their 
style  at  all,  but  treat  all  subjects  alike  and  meet  all 
occasions  in  much  the  same  spirit.    Personality  enters 


156  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

into  everything  any  one  does,  so  that  the  personal 
equation  can  never  be  eliminated  from  literature ;  even 
intentional  dissemblance  always  leaves  some  trace  of 
personality  whether  in  actions  or  in  literature.  It  is 
thus  that  spies  are  caught  and  forgers  detected. 

But  the  personal  element  in  literature  is  itself  sub- 
ject to  much  variation;  it  varies  as  much  in  literature 
wliich  is  a  product  of  life,  as  in  life  which  produces 
literature.  Various  experiences  and  extraneous  in- 
fluences work  great  changes  in  persons,  who  are  thus 
made  to  appear  like  very  different  persons  at  different 
times  in  life.  In  like  manner  these  very  different  per- 
sons find  very  different  expression  in  style  and  diction 
of  literary  productions.  Even  at  any  given  period  of 
life,  a  person  may  appear  to  those  who  observe  him 
as  a  very  different  person  according  as  he  is  wrought 
upon  by  opposite  emotions;  he  may  sometimes  even 
approach  a  state  of  fanaticism  or  ecstacy.  The  dif- 
ferent character  in  which  a  person  thus  temporarily 
appears  will  certainly  reflect  itself  in  anything  he 
writes  upon  the  subject  of  his  passionate  interest, 
though  on  other  subjects,  he  may  appear  in  his  own 
ordinary  style. 

Thus  it  appears  that  great  and  important  as  is 
authorship  as  a  source  of  style  and  diction,  it  is  by  no 
means  a  stable  and  always  calculable  source. 

(b)   Subject. 

Style  and  diction  proceed  ofttimes  in  large  measure 
from  the  subject  upon  which  an  author  writes,  as  is 
already  evident  from  the  preceding  paragraph  on 
authorship.  The  subject  becomes  thus  an  original 
source  of  style  and  diction  lying  back  of  the  author, 
but  always  obliged  to  pass  the  author  and  receive  some 
impress  from  his  individuality. 


FIFTH    INVESTIGATION  157 

Every  subject  has  some  distinctive  features,  else  it 
would  not  be  a  subject.  These  distinctive  features  de- 
mand for  themselves  distinctive  expressions,  else  they 
will  disappear,  and  so  they  become  original  sources  of 
style  and  diction,  always  introducing  some  words  or 
phraseology  into  the  accustomed  style  of  the  author  or 
requiring  some  adaptation  of  it.  In  the  case  of  many 
subjects,  this  demand  for  characteristic  expression  is 
so  slight  that  authorship,  especially,  striking  and  ec- 
centric characteristics  of  authorship,  largely  overcome 
it.  Thus  some  authors  treat  every  subject,  indeed, 
however  different  one  from  another,  in  the  same 
idiosyncratic  manner.  Thus,  it  is  evident,  the  effect 
of  subject  on  style  and  diction  is  sometimes  very  dif- 
ficult to  estimate. 

Many  subjects  have  most  peculiar  distinctive 
features,  which  are  termed  technicalities,  or  the  ter- 
minology of  the  subject.  A  work  on  mathematics  e.g. 
leaves  very  little  room  for  the  idiosyncracies  of  the 
author.  Still  less,  perhaps,  does  a  work  on  Materia 
Medica.  Botany,  because  of  the  brilliant  beauty  of 
the  objects  dealt  with,  affords  greater  opportunity  for 
expression  of  the  author's  individuality,  but  even  in 
Botany  the  terminology  gives  always  a  distinctive  char- 
acter to  the  work,  whoever  may  be  its  author.  So  it 
is  with  other  sciences,  with  the  Law,  or  with  Theology. 
In  every  part,  indeed,  of  human  knowledge  in  its 
present  organized  expression,  i.e.  in  all  technical  works, 
the  subject  is  a  very  potent  original  source  of  style 
and  diction.  A  most  striking  illustration  of  the  effect 
of  subject  or  style  and  diction  is  found  in  comparison 
of  the  style  of  Mark  Twain  in  Huckleberry  Finn,  or 
almost  any  of  his  humorous  works,  and  the  style  of  his 
argument  against  Christian  Science. 


158  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

(c)  Occasion  and  purpose. 

Style  and  Diction  proceed  also  from  purpose  as  an 
original  source.  I  mean  not  a  volitional  and  conscious 
purpose  of  the  author,  which  would  be  a  part  of  author- 
ship and  not  an  additional  source  of  style  and  diction, 
but  the  circumstantial  or  providential  purpose  which 
arises  out  of  the  occasion.  A  very  common  and  illu- 
minating illustration  of  the  effect  of  purpose  as  an 
original  source  of  style  and  diction  is  found  in  the 
teaching  of  the  same  Bible  lesson  by  the  same  teacher 
to  a  class  of  little  children  in  the  primary  department, 
to  another  class  of  boys  of  thirteen,  and  to  an  adult 
class  of  mature  Christian  people.  The  teacher  will  be 
present  in  each  presentation  of  the  subject  and  some 
of  his  idiosyncracies  will  appear  in  each  case,  but,  in 
addition,  the  providential  purpose  arising  out  of  the 
occasion  will  result  in  a  very  marked  change  in  the 
style  and  diction  in  exact  proportion  to  his  success  in 
his  various  efforts.  So,  there  is  no  author  worthy  the 
name  who  is  not  able  readily  to  respond  to  the  occasion 
out  of  which  his  literary  production  arises,  that  provi- 
dential element  which  gives  a  purpose  to  his  work  aside 
from  his  own  conscious  volition. 

(d)  Medium  of  composition. 

Whatever  the  ultimate  source  of  style  and  diction 
may  be  in  each  case,  if  there  be  a  medium  of  com- 
position, as  an  amanuensis  or  editor,  like  the  ancient 
scribe  or  the  modern  private  secretary  or  special  re- 
viewer, it  is  this  latter  who  is  the  immediate  source. 
According  to  the  extent  of  his  work  is  the  modification 
of  style  and  diction  which  he  causes ;  and  to  whatever 
extent,  however  little,  his  work  reaches,  to  that  extent 
does  he  prune  away  the  style  of  the  author  and  give  for 
the  subject  and  the  purpose,  not  the  same  expression 


FIFTH    INVESTIGATION  159 

which  the  author  would  have  given,  but  some  modifica- 
tion of  it  according  to  the  impression  which  the  sub- 
ject and  the  purpose  have  made  upon  himself  as  a 
medium  of  composition.  Style  and  Diction  up  to  this 
point  of  presentation  by  the  author  is  always  the  re- 
sultant product  of  a  combination  of  the  personal  equa- 
tion in  the  author  himself,  imperative  demands  of  the 
subject  for  adequate  expression  and  the  inspiration 
which  the  particular  occasion  may  give  to  the  author 
as  an  unconscious  impelling  purpose  to  his  literary 
work.  In  the  actual  presentation  of  the  author's  work 
to  the  public  there  is  now  often  added  to  all  these  in- 
fluences, that,  also,  of  the  medium  of  composition. 
This  is  a  second  transition  point  by  which  all  the  in- 
fluences which  produce  style  and  diction  must  pass  and 
be  modified. 

What  a  difference  is  ofttimes  perceived  between  the 
impassioned,  jerky,  and  sometimes  almost  fragmen- 
tary, utterances  of  statesmen  in  parliamentary  debate 
and  the  smooth,  orderly,  well-rounded  periods  which 
his  secretary  sends  to  the  paliamentary  record.  How 
much  sometimes  of  the  holy  fire  of  divine  eloquence 
of  some  golden  tongued  preacher  is  missed  from  the 
carefully  edited  volume  of  his  sermons !  Thus  in  much 
modern  literary  work  the  secretary  and  the  editor  has 
a  large  share  in  the  final  form  of  style  and  diction. 

There  is  every  reason  to  believe  that  this  influence 
of  the  professional  "scribe"  in  modern  literary  work 
had  a  much  wider  application  in  Bible  lands  in  Bible 
times.  The  sitting  scribe,  with  ready  hand  and  at- 
tentive ear,  is  one  of  the  most  characteristic  hints  of 
Egyptian  literary  work  as  well  as  one  of  the  most 
striking  works  of  Egyptian  art.  The  amanuensis  em- 
ployed by  Greek  and  Roman  writers  and  the  careful 


160  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

editing  of  every  speech  that  has  come  down  from  them 
to  us  is  matter  of  common  knowledge.  It  is  certain, 
also,  that  Biblical  writers  lived  in  a  land  and  a  time 
of  the  professional  scribe.  His  employment  was  more 
general  than  that  of  the  private  secretary  in  these 
days,  and  does  any  one  think  it  likely  that  Moses  em- 
ployed the  same  scribe  and  only  one  for  forty  years? 
So  well  known  and  universally  recognized  is  this 
medium  of  composition,  the  scribe,  the  editor  and  the 
redactor  and  what  not,  that  the  whole  Documentary 
Theory  of  the  Pentateuch  and  other  portions  of  the 
Bible  rests  upon  this  fact  as  one  of  the  fundamental 
facts  upon  which  the  theory  is  built.  Without  this  basal 
fact,  indeed,  that  theory  and  every  one  like  it  in  any 
literature,  would  be  impossible  as  a  method  of  criticism. 
In  this  Documentary  Theory  there  are  not  only  the 
scribes  who  may  have  originally  taken  down  the  words 
of  the  author,  but  editors  and  redactors  galore  who 
have  grouped  and  combined  and  modified  and  supple- 
mented until  the  work,  as  it  now  stands  a  finished 
product,  differs  very  materially  in  style  and  diction 
from  any  one  of  the  documents  from  which  it  is  con- 
ceived to  have  been  constructed.  Without  in  any  way 
discussing  here  the  merits  of  this  application  of  the 
influence  of  the  medium  of  composition,  it  is  certain 
that  in  Bible  lands  in  Bible  times  there  was  much  use 
made  of  the  scribe  as  a  medium  of  composition  and  that 
consequently  there  is  need  to  keep  watch  for  the  in- 
fluence of  such  medium  of  composition  on  the  finished 
product.  No  discussion  of  the  style  and  diction  of  a 
book  of  the  Bible  is  complete  that  does  not  take  into 
account  and  determine  whether  and  how  much  the 
medium  had  to  do  with  the  style  and  diction. 
3.  Laws  of  interpretation  of  style  and  diction. 


FIFTH    INVESTIGATION  161 

It  is  seldom  possible  to  be  sure  that  one  has  observed 
all  the  laws  of  nature  bearing  upon  a  subject,  much  less 
all  the  laws  of  human  nature,  the  laws  of  the  soul. 
There  are  at  least  three  laws  of  interpretation  which 
must  in  some  measure  be  observed,  if  there  is  to  be  any- 
good  degree  of  accuracy  in  interpretation  of  style  and 
diction.  Some  have  observed  but  one  law,  the  first  of 
the  list,  and  have  arbitrarily,  by  this  one  law,  reached 
positive  conclusions. 

(a)   The  law  of  consistency. 

The  first  and  most  fundamental  law  of  interpreta- 
tion of  style  and  diction  in  an  author  is  the  law  of  con- 
sistency. The  natural  unconscious  or  conscious  tend- 
ency toward  consistency  is  but  a  part  of  the  law  of 
continuity  of  nature  according  to  which  nature  is  the 
same  in  all  ages,  the  law  upon  which  all  scientific  in- 
vestigations ultimately  rest,  by  which  we  all  live  and 
without  which  neither  the  senses,  the  instincts,  nor 
the  intuitions  would  avail  us  anything  in  this  life. 
This  tendency  toward  consistency  seems  to  point  un- 
erringly to  a  time  when  human  nature  was  perfect, 
for  consistency  is  properly  an  attribute  of  perfection. 
Consistency  in  imperfect  beings  is  a  weakness,  it  per- 
petuates our  mistakes  and  always  works  against  any 
correction. 

It  is  this  tendency  toward  consistency,  either  un- 
conscious, sub-conscious  or  conscious,  with  which  we 
have  to  deal  as  a  principal  law  of  interpretation  of 
style  and  diction  in  literature.  It  is  universally 
recognized  that  an  author  usually  strives  to  be  con- 
sistent with  himself,  i.e.  he  strives  after  "his  own  way 
of  saying  things."  It  is  this  tendency  which  produces 
what  is  called  his  style.  It  is  his  copy-righted  trade- 
mark of  individuality.    All  there  is  in  style  that  makes 


162  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

it  recognizable  is  due  to  his  tendency  toward  con- 
sistency. An  author  may  purpose  to  endeavor  not  to 
be  consistent  in  a  particular  literary  production,  but 
to  produce  some  other  style  than  his  own.  Like  every 
work  of  counterfeiting,  it  is  never  perfectly  done.  If 
one's  literary  microscope  be  sufficiently  powerful  and 
his  skill  adequate,  something  can  always  be  found  to 
expose  the  attempt  at  inconsistency.  The  author  tends 
unconsciously  toward  "his  own  way  of  saying  things," 
Thus  the  law  of  consistency  becomes  the  first  and  most 
important  law  of  interpretation  of  style  and  diction. 

(b)   The  law  of  variation. 

A  second  law  of  the  interpretation  of  style  and  dic- 
tion is  the  law  of  variation.  This  law  is  sometimes, 
indeed  quite  commonly  overlooked.  A  very  little  ex- 
amination of  the  subject  will  make  the  existence  and 
operation  of  this  law  clear.  The  needle  of  the  compass 
has  a  law  of  consistency  like  the  law  of  style  and  dic- 
tion which  we  have  just  considered,  according  to  which 
law  the  needle  consistently  points  to  the  great  magnet, 
the  magnetic  pole.  Notwithstanding,  some  local  in- 
fluence which  tends  to  draw  it  aside  is  certain  to  affect 
it,  and  that  because  of  its  very  nature.  There  is  thus 
a  law  of  variation  as  well  as  a  law  of  consistency  in 
the  operation  of  the  needle.  The  law  of  variation  is 
in  reality  only  a  phase  of  the  law  of  consistency.  For 
it  is  because  the  needle  is  consistently  subject  to  mag- 
netic influence  that  it  varies  from  the  usual  point  under 
special  disturbing  influences  which  are  able  to  over- 
come, in  whole  or  in  part,  the  attraction  of  the  magnetic 
pole.  It  is  not  that  local  influences  may  thus  operate, 
but  where  they  exist,  they  always  do  so  operate. 
There  is  thus  a  law  of  variation,  and  the  law  of  con- 
sistency is  consistently  subject  to  this  law  of  variation. 


FIFTH    INVESTIGATION  163 

Now,  there  operates  upon  the  author  not  only  the 
law  of  consistency,  as  we  have  seen,  but,  also,  the  same 
law  of  variation.  It  is  not  simply  that  such  influences 
may  operate  to  modify  the  law  of  consistency  in 
authors,  but,  where  the  influences  exist,  they  always 
do  so  operate.  It  is  thus  a  law.  Here,  also,  the  law 
of  consistency  is  consistently  subject  to  the  law  of 
variation,  and  the  literary  critic  must  calculate  this 
variation  as  carefully  as  does  the  navigator  the  varia- 
tion of  the  needle.  We  have  already  come  in  sight  of 
this  law  of  variation  in  considering  the  influence  of 
subject  and  purpose  as  original  sources  of  style  and 
diction.  There  we  noted  especially  the  fact,  here  the 
law  that  governs  the  fact.  As  with  the  needle,  so  with 
the  author,  this  law  of  variation  is  in  reality  a  mode  of 
the  law  of  consistency.  The  author  is  subject  to  in- 
fluences; the  greatest  and  strongest  of  these  is  the 
innate  tendency  to  consistency  which  turns  him  to  his 
magnetic  pole,  but  he  is  subject,  also,  to  local  and 
temporary  influences,  as  subject  or  purpose,  and  so 
becomes  subject  to  the  law  of  variation,  which,  under 
certain  circumstances  is  sure  to  turn  him  aside  from 
his  accustomed  style  and  diction. 

This  law  of  variation  results  sometimes  in  seeming 
anomalies.  Most  authors  are  liable  at  times  to  be 
capricious,  under  some  exciting  influence,  and  to  give 
off  productions  wholly  dissimilar  to  their  accustomed 
style  and  diction.  Sometimes  this  is  intentional,  to 
achieve  a  purpose  by  a  quite  unwonted  style  and  dic- 
tion; more  frequently  it  is  unintentional,  a  kind  of 
obsession  of  excitement  and  interest  that  becomes  a 
law  unto  itself;  it  makes  men  as  it  were  "speak  with 
tongues."  Under  such  special  excitement  one  attains 
to  a  certain  glibness  of  tongue  and  facileness  of  pen,  a 


164  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

readiness  for  the  grotesque  and  an  ability  of  char- 
acterization not  to  be  recognized  as  his  style  at  all.  He 
then  does  things  he  would  not  and  could  not  do  at 
another  time.  Some  years  ago  I  went  with  a  friend 
to  the  Kircherean  Museum  in  Rome  to  see  the  famous 
graffiti  entitled  "Alexamenus  worships  his  God." 
There  was  some  difficulty  about  our  admission  to  the 
Museum  at  that  time.  Under  the  stimulus  of  impend- 
ing disappointment,  for  it  was  our  only  opportunity 
then  to  see  the  antiquity,  I  pleaded  with  such  earnest- 
ness that  the  guardian  of  the  Museum  admitted  us. 
Afterwards  my  friend  said  teasingly,  ''You  told  me 
you  could  not  speak  French."  "Well, '  I  replied,  "I 
cannot,  but  this  time  I  had  to."  So,  ofttimes,  authors 
under  the  special  influence  of  great  excitement  or 
determined  purpose  or  impending  danger  or  exultant 
hope  are  able,  as  it  were,  to  "speak  with  tongues,"  to 
accomplish  literary  wonders  which,  from  the  style  and 
diction,  no  one  would  ever  ascribe  to  them.  The  second 
of  these  variations  of  style,  the  intentional  effort ;  not 
to  deceive  but  to  attract  attention  to  a  subject  or  ac- 
complish an  over-weaning  purpose  is  almost  a  habit 
with  some  authors.  They  strive  after  striking  ex- 
pressions and  unusual  meanings  of  words  for  their 
purposes  and  give  themselves  so  much  to  phrase- 
making  that  their  style  is  completely  changed,  the  law 
of  variation  is  merged  into  the  simple  law  of  con- 
sistency, until  the  peculiarity  has  become  a  fixed  and 
common  style  in  that  author. 

Much  value  is  at  times  ascribed  to  variation  in  style 
and  diction,  especially  in  the  choice  of  synonyms,  so 
that  it  has  been  regarded  as  one  of  the  important  rules 
of  rhetoric.  Who  does  not  know  that  the  fad  for 
avoiding  consistency  in  diction  by  constant  variation 


FIFTH    INVESTIGATION  165 

through  the  use  of  synonyms  in  the  days  of  King  James 
was  responsible  for  many  obscurities  in  the  transla- 
tion of  the  Bible  into  English?  Especially  is  this  so 
in  the  closely  reasoned  Epistles  of  Paul  where  the 
translation  of  the  same  Greek  word  in  rapid  succession 
by  different  synonyms  in  English  has  led  to  much  con- 
fusion and  no  little  controversy  and  factions  and,  some- 
times, perhaps,  to  differences  of  creed.  This  was  an 
exaggeration  of  variation  in  style  to  the  extent  of  be- 
ing a  fault  and  a  menace. 

But  whether  the  variation  is  intentional  or  unin- 
tentional, whether  an  ornament  or  a  detriment,  the 
law  of  variation  in  style  and  diction  always  exists  like 
the  law  of  the  variation  of  the  needle  in  the  compass. 
So  the  critic,  like  the  navigator,  must  always  enquire 
after  the  actual  variation  in  accordance  with  the  law. 

(c)   The  law  of  equilibrium. 

This  last,  and,  in  some  respects,  most  important, 
law  of  the  interpretation  of  the  significance  of  style 
and  diction  in  the  determining  of  authorship  is  rarely 
taken  into  the  account.  Because  it  is  overlooked,  the 
interpretation  of  style  and  diction  in  terms  of  author- 
ship becomes  very  hazardous  and  unreliable.  The 
reading  of  the  needle  of  the  compass,  when  it  varies 
because  of  some  distracting  influence,  does  not  record 
the  amount  of  such  influence,  but  the  equilibrium  be- 
tween the  amount  of  the  distracting  influence  and  the 
tendency  of  the  needle  to  point  to  the  true  magnetic 
pole,  i.e.  between  the  consistency  and  the  variation  of 
the  needle.  So  the  resulting  style  and  diction  which 
comes  from  different  influences  bearing  upon  the 
tendency  toward  consistency  in  the  author  himself 
represents  not  the  exact  style  of  the  author  nor  the 
amount  of  such  distracting  influences,  i.e.  neither  con- 


166  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

sistency  nor  variation,  but  an  equilibrium  between  the 
two,  i.e.  the  style  and  diction  of  the  author  as  changed 
by  these  distracting  influences.  Further,  the  literary 
critic  may  be  most  exacting  in  his  endeavors  to  esti- 
mate the  author's  real  style,  i.e.  his  consistency,  by 
making  allowances  for  the  distracting  influences,  i.e. 
the  variation,  but  in  every  case  the  equilibrium  thus 
decided  upon  by  the  critic  is  his  own.  Whether  or  not 
it  exactly  corresponds  to  the  equilibrium  of  the  author 
between  consistency  and  variation  in  his  composition 
can  never  be  certainly  known.  The  exactness  or  in- 
exactness of  the  critic's  estimate  depends  up  the  un- 
certain personal  equation  of  the  author,  which  the 
critic  does  not  know,  and  the  critic's  own  personal 
equation,  which  is  just  as  little  known  to  himself.  Thus 
literary  criticism  as  it  concerns  authorship  can  never 
be  an  exact  science;  it  has  always  limits  and  uncer- 
tainties which  vary  in  inverse  ratio  as  the  amount  of 
literature  of  a  given  author  available  for  comparison. 
Where  there  is  but  one  piece  of  such  literature,  and 
that  a  small  piece,  the  uncertainty  is  so  great  as  to 
make  the  attempt  to  give  an  author's  name  to  style  and 
diction  well  nigh  worthless. 

4.  It  is  well  now,  in  the  conclusion  of  the  discussion 
of  this  subject  of  the  interpretation  of  style  and  diction 
in  literary  criticism,  to  gather  up  the  facts  observed 
that  we  may  get  a  clear  view  of  the  value  of  such  inter- 
pretation of  style  and  diction  and  especially  in  the  Pen- 
tateuchal  books  and  other  portions  of  the  Bible.  Hav- 
ing first  observed  the  general  value  of  such  interpreta- 
tion, we  can  the  better  estimate  the  value  of  its  par- 
ticular application. 

(a)   Recognition  of  sources  of  style  and  diction. 

Recognition  of  the  sources  of  style  and  diction  is,  in 


FIFTH   INVESTIGATION  167 

part,  easy  enough.  The  subject,  even  if  not  stated,  is 
written  all  over  the  treatment  of  it.  The  occasion,  out 
of  which  the  purpose  arose,  is  usually  either  stated  or 
is  to  be  gathered  from  the  treatment  of  the  subject. 
The  one  definitely  uncertain  element,  when  there  is  no 
external  evidence  and  all  is  to  be  determined  from  in- 
ternal evidence,  is  authorship.  To  this  is  to  be  added, 
however,  the  greatly  variable  element  of  medium  of 
composition,  which  in  some  cases  does  not  exist,  in 
others,  has  but  little  influence  upon  style  and  diction, 
and  in  still  other  cases,  becomes  scarcely  less  im- 
portant than  authorship  itself.  But  to  which  of  these 
classes  an  individual  instance  belongs  is  always  an  un- 
certainty and  ofttimes  a  problem  impossible  of  solu- 
tion. For  the  very  reason  that  authorship  is  such  a 
variable  element  among  the  sources  of  style  and  diction 
it  is  often  treated  as  though  it  were  the  only  element 
and  the  whole  question  of  style  and  diction  treated  as 
having  little  bearing  except  upon  that  authorship. 
When  it  is  so  treated,  the  value  of  such  interpretation 
of  style  and  diction  in  literary  criticism  is  greatly  re- 
duced, as  much  reduced  as  when  any  other  subject  is 
treated  thus  partially,  omitting  the  consideration  of 
one  or  more  important  elements. 

(b)   Dangers. 

The  danger  of  making  mistake  in  determining  the 
subject  in  any  piece  of  real  literature  is  nothing;  in 
determining  the  purpose,  usually  very  small;  in  de- 
termining the  author  or  the  influence  of  the  medium 
of  composition  and  that  from  internal  evidence  alone, 
is  very  great.  What  a  long,  intimate  fellowship  is 
necessary  in  order  to  know  a  personality  in  life,  and 
how  often  a  new  trait  is  discovered  in  an  old  friend! 
Seeing  that  it  is  so,  it  is  amazing  that  some  think  to 


168  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

recognize  a  person  unerringly  in  literature,  even  to 
the  detecting  of  an  insert  of  a  sentence  or  phrase  or 
even  a  word  from  some  other  author!  Is  personality 
so  much  more  easily  recognizable  in  literature  than  in 
life?  In  fact,  the  most  egregious  blunders  in  the 
recognition  of  personality  in  literature  may  be  made 
by  those  who  are  most  competent  to  avoid  mistakes. 

An  authentic  instance  of  such  mistake  came  to  my 
attention  some  years  ago.  Dr.  B.  and  Dr.  C.  were 
associated  in  the  editing  of  a  religious  newspaper. 
(These  initials  appear  fictitious  but  they  are  authentic ; 
which  is  another  illustration  of  the  indecisiveness  of 
internal  literary  evidence) .  Both  these  men  were  well 
known  throughout  the  religious  denomination  in  which 
their  paper  was  read.  Dr.  B.  was  a  stern  man  in  dis- 
cussion, with  a  direct,  incisive,  habit  of  thought  and 
address,  and  but  little  given  to  adornment  of  what  he 
had  to  say.  Dr.  C.  was  a  most  jovial  and  vivacious 
man,  given  to  flights  of  imagination  and  ornateness  of 
expression.  The  personality  of  each  of  these  men  and 
many  specimens  of  their  writings  were  known  to  their 
reading  public.  An  extended,  but  unsigned,  series  of 
editorials  on  Systematic  Theology  was  published  in  the 
paper  of  which  they  were  both  editors.  It  so  hap- 
pened that  about  that  time  Dr.  C.  was  presented  as  a 
candidate  for  a  vacant  chair  of  Systematic  Theology, 
and  it  was  so  confidently  asserted  by  those  opposed  to 
his  candidacy  that  he  was  the  author  of  the  articles  and 
had  written  them  as  a  campaign  document  that  it  came 
near  defeating  his  election.  Some  years  afterward.  Dr. 
B.  told  me,  with  much  amusement,  that  he  wrote  the 
troublesome  articles  himself  and  that  Dr.  C.  had  noth- 
ing whatever  to  do  with  them. 

If  detection  of  well-known  living  personalities,  from 


FIFTH   INVESTIGATION  169 

an  extensive  literature,  by  persons  well  acquainted 
with  both  the  persons  and  their  writing,  is  so  uncer- 
tain, how  little  is  the  value  of  attempts  to  determine 
authorship  by  literary  criteria  of  style  and  diction, 
from  a  single  small  piece  of  literature,  by  an  author 
whose  very  existence  is  otherwise  unknown ! 

Thus  is  proved  the  thesis  already  announced,  that  lit- 
erary criticism  as  it  concerns  authorship  can  never  be 
an  exact  science;  it  has  always  limits  and  uncertain- 
ties which  vary  in  inverse  ratio  as  the  amount  of  litera- 
ture of  a  given  author  available  for  comparison.  Where 
there  is  but  one  small  piece  of  such  literature,  and  that 
by  an  author  unknown,  even,  historically,  the  uncer- 
tainty is  so  great  as  to  make  the  attempt  to  give  author- 
ship assignment  to  style  and  diction  well  nigh  worth- 
less. 

IV.  We  come  now  to  the  examination  of  the  actual 
marks  of  Style  and  Vocabulary  which  are  to  be  found 
in  these  various  divisions  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  to 
see,  as  much  as  such  examination  may  show,  how  har- 
monious is  the  Style  and  Vocabulary  throughout  each 
division.  Most  elaborate  lists  of  the  marks  of  Style 
and  Vocabulary  of  the  various  authors  according  to 
the  Documentary  Theory  have  been  prepared  by  criti- 
cal specialists.  As  the  divisions  of  the  Pentateuch  ac- 
cording to  the  Documentary  Theory  and  the  divisions 
according  to  the  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws  are  so 
nearly  identical,  it  is  evident  that  the  various  marks 
pointed  out  in  the  divisions  according  to  the  Docu- 
mentary Theory  will  be  found,  also,  in  these  divisions 
according  to  the  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws.  Accord- 
ingly, all  the  work  done  in  making  and  recording  such 
lists  for  the  Documentary  Theory  is  available  and  need 
not  be  done  again.     The  Oxford  Hexateuch  presents 


170  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

most  extended  lists  of  such  marks  of  Style  and  Vocabu- 
lary in  J,  in  E,  in  JE,  in  D  and  in  P.  As  these  lists 
are  extended  to  Joshua,  and  later  books  of  the  Bible  not 
included  in  the  present  investigation,  such  references 
to  books  other  than  those  of  the  Pentateuch  may  be 
omitted  in  quotations  here.  I  have,  also,  prepared, 
independently,  a  list  of  marks  of  Style  and  Vocabulary 
apparent  in  the  Pentateuch,  identical  in  some  par- 
ticulars with  the  marks  pointed  out  by  the  Oxford 
workers  and  quite  different  in  other  particulars.  There 
are,  also,  some  exceedingly  interesting  things  to  be 
pointed  out  in  the  lists  of  the  Oxford  workers  which 
those  lists  were  not  intended  to  show,  but  which  they 
do  show. 

1.  The  lists  of  the  Oxford  scholars  are  available  for 
those  who  wish  to  refer  to  them  and  need  not  be  quoted 
in  full  here.  Indeed,  the  amazement  is  that  they  were 
ever  prepared  in  full.  The  introduction  to  the  lists 
says  (Vol.  II,  p.  183)  :  "Some  results,  however,  must 
be  regarded  as  accidental,  but  genuine  characteristics 
of  style  are  probably  to  be  seen  in  2,  3,  6,  7,  9,  etc.,  on 
the  part  of  J,  and  in  95,  96,  99,  102,  104,  105,  107,  etc., 
on  the  part  of  E."  Why  should  those  not  considered 
"genuine  characteristics"  be  included  in  a  list  of  char- 
acteristics of  style  at  all?  Undoubtedly  the  sight  of 
these  marks,  not  "genuine  characteristics,"  gives  an 
appearance  of  voluminousness  to  the  few  "genuine" 
marks  of  style  scattered  throughout  these  long 
lists  which  these  marks  do  not  of  themselves  have. 
All  these  peculiarities  of  the  books  of  the  Pentateuch 
arising  from  subject,  occasion,  or  medium  of  composi- 
tion, would  arise  in  like  manner  whatever  author  had 
been  at  work,  and  so  would  have  been  found  in  the 
Pentateuch,  though  each  part  was  by  the  same  author. 


FIFTH   INVESTIGATION  171 

What  an  absurdity  it  is  that  such  words  as  "camels," 
"Canaan,"  "Goshen"  and  "flocks"  should  be  included 
among  "marks"  in  lists  intended  to  show  different 
styles  sufficient  to  prove  different  authors,  as  they 
are  included  in  the  Oxford  lists!  Manifestly  any 
author  writing  about  "camels,"  "gardens,"  "Goshen," 
and  "flocks"  would  use  these  words.  The  same  remark 
applies  to  "Sodom,"  "three  days  journey,"  and  a  mul- 
titude of  other  words  and  phrases  included  in  the  lists 
of  the  Oxford  Hexateuch  (Of.  II,  pp.  185-221). 

2.  To  the  lists  of  "genuine  characteristics"  accord- 
ing to  the  Oxford  scholars,  noted  above,  I  will  add 
others  selected  from  their  lists,  thus  unfolding  their 
"et  cetera"  which  they  do  not  expand,  and  I  will,  also, 
select  a  number  of  references  from  their  lists  of 
"marks"  of  D  and  P  which  seem  to  be,  also,  real  marks 
of  Style  and  Vocabulary.  In  addition,  we  will  see  some 
of  those  things  which  these  lists  show,  of  which  their 
distinguished  authors  make  no  mention,  and  which  it 
is  a  fair  inference  that  they  did  not  intend  them  to 
show. 

The  argument  from  these  lists  of  words  and  phrases 
in  the  lists  of  the  Oxford  Hexateuch  is  that  the  pre- 
dominant use  of  them  being  in  JE,  or  D,  or  P,  they 
are  therefore  proved  to  be  marks  of  the  Style  of  such 
author  or  document.  Now,  on  the  view  presented  in 
these  investigations,  that  the  document  called  P  is  in 
reality  "statutes"  with  accompanying  narrative  and 
supplying,  also,  portions  of  the  narrative  in  Genesis, 
and  that  the  document  called  JE  is  in  reality  "judg- 
ments" with  the  accompanying  narrative,  and  present- 
ing, also,  portions  of  the  narrative  in  Genesis,  and  that 
the  document  D  is  the  oratorical  presentation  of  all 
the  laws  in  the  speeches  of  Moses  in  Deuteronomy,  it 


172  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

is  apparent  that  P,  the  "statutes"  and  D,  the  addresses 
of  Moses  in  Deuteronomy  and  the  narrative  portions 
accompanying  both  "statutes"  and  "judgments"  and 
the  narrative  in  Genesis,  were  all,  in  reality,  by  the 
same  author.  Noting  these  things  and  then  examining 
these  lists  of  peculiar  phrases  in  the  Orford  Hexateuch 
from  this  standpoint,  it  is  soon  seen  that  a  large  por- 
tion of  the  M^ords  and  phrases  said  to  be  characteristic 
of  the  narrative  in  J  and  E  and  the  narratives  in  P  are 
in  reality  characteristics  of  this  one  author,  and  the 
argument  drawn  in  the  Oxford  Hexateuch  from  count- 
ing the  number  of  times  words  and  phrases  are  used 
gives  far  more  support  to  this  view  of  the  Pentateuch 
and  its  origin  now  presented,  than  to  the  Documentary 
Theory  for  which  it  is  made.  It  is  so,  because  all  the 
instances  of  the  use  of  a  word  or  phrase  in  the  nar- 
rative in  the  Documents  and  in  the  "statutes"  in  P 
would  be  added  together  for  this  one  author. 

A  few  examples  will  make  this  very  clear.  Taking 
from  the  lists  of  the  Oxford  Hexateuch  words  and 
phrases  already  specified  as  "genuine  marks"  of  Style 
in  JE  together  with  some  additional  instances  from  the 
same  lists  and  using  for  convenience  of  reference  the 
same  numbers  as  in  the  Oxford  lists  we  have  the  fol- 
lowing : 

2.  "According  to  these  words,"  "the  word  of"  .  .  . 
"after  this  manner"  (Heb.  k  and  dabhar).  Omitting 
the  references  to  Joshua  this  phrase  is  found  in  J  15 
times,  all  in  narrative  portions  of  the  Pentateuch;  in 
Rje  2  times,  in  the  narrative  portions;  in  D  3  times; 
in  P  1,  in  narrative.  Thus  not  a  single  one  of  these  in- 
stances occurs  in  the  "judgments"  but  all  of  the  20  in- 
stances either  in  D  or  in  the  narrative  portions  of  the 
other  books,  and  thus  representing  the  real  author  of 


FIFTH   INVESTIGATION  173 

the  Pentateuch  according  to  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws. 
Thus  the  argument  from  this  mark  of  Style  and 
Vocabulary  made  for  the  JE  Document  in  the  Oxford 
Hexateuch  is  far  stronger  for  the  one  author-  of  the 
Pentateuch  according  to  the  KINDS  and  USES  of 
laws. 

3.  "And  it  came  to  pass  when"  (Heb.  vayehiki). 
This  phrase  is  found  in  J  5  times,  all  in  narrative  por- 
tions of  the  law  books  and  in  Genesis;  in  E  once,  in 
narrative ;  and  Rd  once  in  narrative ;  a  total  of  7  times, 
none  of  which  occurs  in  "judgments,"  but  all  in  the 
portions  which  represent  the  one  author  of  the  Penta- 
teuch according  to  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws.  The 
argument  of  the  Oxford  Hexateuch  that  this  phrase  is 
a  mark  of  JE  because  it  occurs  6  times  in  the  portions 
claimed  for  that  document  is  not  so  conclusive  as  the 
7  times  it  is  found  here  in  the  one  author  of  the  Penta- 
teuch, according  to  the  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws. 

Now  that  the  argument  has  been  given,  the  ex- 
amples, including  these  two  already  presented,  may  be 
tabulated,  "A"  being  used  to  denote  the  one  author  of 
the  Pentateuch  according  to  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws. 


174  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

TABULATED  LIST  OF  MARKS  OF  AUTHORSHIP 
Comparing  those   of  the   Documentary   Theory 

WITH  THOSE  OF  KINDS  AND  USES  OF  LAWS 
COLLECTION  1 — J  CHARACTERISTICS 

2  "According  to  these  words"   (Heb.  ke  with 

dabhar),  J  15  times,  in  narrative;  Rje  2 
times,  in  narrative;  D  3  times;  P  1,  in 
narrative  A  20 

3  "And  it  came  to  pass  when"   (Heb.  vaye- 

hiki),  J  5,  narrative;  E  1,  narrative,  Rd 

1,  narrative A    7 

6  "Before"   (ere,  not  yet — terem),  J  9,  nar- 

rative   A    9 

7  "To  beget"  (yalad),  J  10,  narrative A  10 

9     "Behold  now"  (henah  n'e),  J  9,  narrative__A     9 

12a  "Bow  to  the  earth"  (hishtahvah  artsah),  J 

5,  narrative;  E  3,  narrative A    8 

15a  "Call  upon  the  name  of  Jehovah"    (kero 

beshem  yehovah),  J  6,  narrative A    6 

31     "Find  favor"  or  "grace"  (metso  hen),  J  21, 

narrative,  D  1;  P  1 A  23 

34  "Flowing  with  milk  and  honey"  {zabath 
halabh  vadabhash),  J  8,  narrative;  D  6; 
Ph  1,  narrative A  15 

43     "Hasten"   (mehor),  H  16,  narrative;  E  1, 

narrative   A  17 

44a  "Hearken"  (shem'  lekol) ,  J  6,  narrative ;  E 
1,  narrative ;  Rje  1  (both  a  "statute"  and 
a  "judgment")   A    8 

64     "Peradventure"  (ulay),  J  15,  narrative;  E 

3,  narrative A  18 

85  "Therefore" ;  "wherefore"  (i  ken) ,  J  17,  nar- 
rative; E  6,  narrative;  D  8,  in  narrative. 


FIFTH   INVESTIGATION  175 

and  in  "statute"  portions,  except  Deut. 
XXIV :18  in  a  "judgment"  portion;  P  4, 
narrative  and  "statute"  portions,  except 
Ex.  XX:  11  in  the  "Commandments." 
Total,    35 A  33 

COLLECTION  2 — E  CHARACTERISTICS 

110  "To  offer"    (haaleh),  E  9,  narrative;  J  1 

narrative;  D  2,  in  "statute"  portions;  P 

4,  in  narrative  and  "statute"  portions A  16 

111  "On  account  of"    {alodhoth),   E  5,  narra- 

tive; J  1,  narrative A     6 

112a  "One  (to)  another"  {ish  el-ahiv),  E  6,  nar- 
rative ;  J  2,  narrative ;  P  9,  "statute"  and 

narrative  portions A  17 

112b  "One  to  another"  {ishel  or  meth,  or  hen,  re- 
ehu) ,  E  9,  3  in  narrative  or  "statute"  por- 
tions, and  6  in  "judgment"  portions;  J  7, 
narrative;    D    2,    "judgment"    portions; 

Total,   18 A  10 

118     "To  suffer"  or  "to  give  leave"  (nathan),  E 

5,  narrative;  J  1,  narrative;  Rje  1,  nar- 
rative; D  1,  narrative A     8 

COLLECTION  3 — JE  CHARACTERISTICS 

121  "Afar  off"  (rahok),  JE,  7,  narrative;  D  5, 

3  in  narrative,  2  in  "judgment"  portions; 

P  1,  in  "statute"  portion.    Total,  13 A  11 

122  "Afflict"  (innah),  JE  10,  9  in  narrative,  1 

in  "judgment"  portion;  D  7,  4  in  nar- 
rative, 3  in  "judgment"  portions.    Total, 

17   A  14 

128  "Arise"  (kum),  JE  25,  narrative;  D  5,  nar- 
rative; P  1,  narrative A  31 


176  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

139b  "To  call  the  name"  {kero  shem) ,  JE  59,  nar- 
rative; D  2,  narrative;  P  12,  narrative. _ A  73 
147a  "To  draw  near"  (na^fas/i),  JE  22,  narrative; 
D  44,  43  in  narrative,  1  in  "judgment" 
portion ;  P  10,  6  in  "statute"  portions,  4  in 

narrative.     Total,  36 A  35 

164     "Go  to"   (habhah),  JE  5,  narrative;  JE  4, 

a&b      narrative;  D  1,  narrative A  10 

181  "Make  a  covenant"  (karath  berith),  JE  10, 
narrative;  D  10,  9  in  narrative,  1  in 
"judgment"  portion;  Rd  1.  Total,  21___A  19 
233a  "To  be  wroth"  {harah  'ph),  JE  17,  16  in 
narrative,  1  in  "judgment"  portion;  D  5, 
3  in  narrative,  2  in  "judgment"  portions; 
P  1,  narrative.    Total,  23 A  21 

II.     THE  DEUTERONOMIC  SCHOOL,  D 

13  "Always"  (kol  hayyamim),  D  8,  6  in  narra- 
tive, 2  in  "statute"  portions;  J  2,  narra- 
tive     A  10 

15  "All  the  words  of  this  law"  {eth-kol-dibber 
hattorah  hazzoth),  D  6,  5  in  narrative,  1 
in   "statute"  portion A     6 

37a  "That  which  is  right  in  the  eyes  of  Jehovah" 
(vesitha  hayijashar  vehattobh  beene  ye- 
hovah) ,  D  5,  in  "statute"  portions ;  Rje  1, 
in  "statute  of  judgment" A     6 

37b  "That  which  is  evil"  (hara  beene),  D  4,  3 
in  narrative,  1  in  "judgment"  portion; 
P  1,  narrative.     Total,  5 A     4 

46     "Until  they  were  finished"  {adh  turn  mam) , 

D  5,  narrative A     5 

87  "The  place  which  Jehovah  shall  choose" 
(hammakom  asher  yibhha?'  yehovah),  D 


FIFTH   INVESTIGATION  177 

20,  19  in  "statute"  portions,  1  in  "judg- 
ment" portions A  19 

III.    PRIESTLY  LAW  AND   HISTORY  BOOK,   P 

50a  "Cut  off  from  his  people"  (karath  min),  P 
18,  17  in  "statute"  portions,  1  in  narra- 
tive   A  18 

50b  "Cut  off"  {karath),  P  5,  4  in  "statute"  por- 
tions, 1  in  narrative;  J  1,  narrative A     6 

50c  "To    cut    off    from    Israel    theocratically" 

(hibrith),  P  4,  "statute"  portions A    4 

86a  "To  be  holy"  (kadash  qal),F  6,  5  in  "stat- 
ute" portions,  1  in  narrative A     6 

86b  "To  be  sanctified"  (kadash,  niphal),  P  4,  3 

in  "statute"  portions,  1  in  narrative A    4 

86c  "To  sanctify"  (kadash,  piel),  P  32,  28  in 
"statute"  portions,  2  in  "judgment"  por- 
tions ("Commandments"),  2  in  narra- 
tive; J  3,  in  narrative;  E  2,  "judgment" 
portions   (commandments).     Total,  37 — A  33 

86d  "To  sanctify"  (kadash,  hiphil),  P  15,  14  in 

"statute"  portions,  1  in  narrative A  15 

86e  "To  sanctify"  (kadash,  hithpael),  P  2,  in 
"statute"  portion ;  J  2,  1  in  "statute"  por- 
tion and  1  in  narrative A     4 

These  lists,  particularly  that  of  P,  could  be  greatly 
extended,  but  these  are  quite  sufficient  to  make  com- 
parison between  the  evidence  which  they  bear  as  marks 
of  Style  in  the  Documentary  Theory  and  in  these 
divisions  according  to  the  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws. 
Whatever  evidence  these  words  and  phrases  give  for 
the  Style  of  J,  E,  JE,  D  and  P,  they  give  equal  evidence, 
in  every  instance,  but  one,  for  the  Style  of  the  one 


178  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

author  of  the  Pentateuch;  in  most  instances  they  pro- 
vide  stronger  evidence  for  the  one  author.  In  detail 
the  comparison  of  evidence  is  as  follows : 

Of  the  11  examples  taken  from  J  characteristics,  in 
7  the  evidence  is  stronger  for  the  one  author,  A,  in  the 
following  ratios  respectively:  8  to  5,  23  to  21,  15  to  8, 
17  to  16,  8  to  6,  18  to  15,  33  to  17.  In  all  the  five  ex- 
amples taken  from  E  characteristics,  the  evidence  is 
stronger  for  A  as  follows :  16  to  9,  6  to  5,  17  to  6,  10 
to  9,  8  to  5.  In  the  8  examples  of  JE  characteristics, 
all  give  greater  evidence  for  the  Style  of  A,  as  fol- 
lows :  11  to  7,  14  to  10,  31  to  35,  73  to  59,  35  to  22, 
10  to  4, 19  to  10,  21  to  17.  In  the  6  examples  cited  from 
D  as  evidence  of  Style,  2  give  equal  evidence  for  A,  as 
follows:  10  to  8,  6  to  5;  1  gives  greater  evidence  for  D 
than  for  A,  20  to  19.  In  the  8  examples  cited  from  P 
as  characteristics  of  Style,  5  give  equal  evidence  for 
A,  3  others  give  greater  evidence  for  A,  as  follows :  6 
to  5,  33  to  32,  4  to  2. 

3.  In  addition  to  this  examination  of  the  "genuine 
marks  of  Style"  pointed  out  by  advocates  of  the  Docu- 
mentary Theory  in  the  Oxford  Hexateuch  and  the  com- 
parison of  the  evidence  they  furnish  for  the  Style  of 
J,  E,  JE,  D  and  P  with  the  evidence  which  the  same 
data  furnishes  for  one  author,  A,  of  the  narrative  and 
the  "statute"  portions,  according  to  KINDS  and  USES 
of  laws,  I  have,  also,  conducted  an  independent  investi- 
gation into  what  seem  to  be  "genuine  character- 
istics of  Style"  in  the  "statute"  portions  and  in  the 
"judgment"  portions  of  the  Pentateuch.  I  have  not 
made  any  attempt  to  show  every  instance  in  which 
these  characteristic  words  and  phrases  occur  in  the 
various  divisions  of  the  Pentateuch  according  to 
KINDS  and  USES  of  laws,  but  only  such  and  suffi- 


FIFTH   INVESTIGATION  179 

cient  examples  as  make  perfectly  apparent  how  really 
characteristic  these  words  and  phrases  are  of  the  por- 
tions in  which  they  occur,  how  they  stand  out  in  a 
way  to  be  very  patent,  and  so  to  produce  that  subtle, 
yet  definite  and  indisputable,  impression  of  style  upon 
the  reader.  For  after  all,  style  at  the  last  analysis,  is 
not  determined  by  counting  words  and  making  mathe- 
matical comparisons,  for  mathematical  proportions 
often  make  little  or  no  impression  upon  the  mind,  but 
by  that  subtle  something  in  words  and  phrases  which 
leaves  an  ineffacable  impression  upon  the  mental  sen- 
sorium.  It  was  so  that  Dickens  in  his  novels  was  wont 
to  distinguish,  and  identify  unmistakably,  his  char- 
acters by  some  peculiar  word  or  phrase  so  that  "some- 
thing turn  up"  stands  for  MacCawber  for  all  time  in 
English  literature,  and  "the  dearest  girl"  brings  up 
visions  of  Dora.  Mathematical  calculations  and  com- 
parisons would  show  that  many  common  words  occur 
vastly  more  frequently  in  these  same  books  of  the 
novelist  than  do  these  expressions,  but  they  make  no 
impression  whatever  of  style  upon  the  reader  of 
Dickens,  and  in  fact  constitute  no  element  of  style.  So, 
in  the  Pentateuch,  the  counting  of  the  number  of  times 
a  word  or  phrase  is  used,  as  in  the  Oxford  Hexateuch, 
of  such  expressions  as  "the  tenth  part,"  "these  are," 
"this  is,"  "also,"  does  not  indicate  a  tithe  of  the  im- 
pression left  on  the  mind  of  the  reader  that  is  pro- 
duced by  such  words  and  phrases  as  "mine  angel," 
"know  by  name"  and  "abomination"  which  yet  occur 
but  a  few  times  in  comparison  with  these  words  and 
phrases  mentioned  (Cf.  lists,  p.  182f). 

4.  In  addition  to  these  "genuine  characteristics  of 
style,"  there  are  many  other  words  and  phrases  found 
in  these  various  divisions  of  the    Pentateuch    which 


180  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

should  be  noted  here.  The  absurdity  of  listing  such 
words  as  "camel,"  "garden,"  etc.,  in  a  discussion  of 
style  has  been  pointed  out,  but  it  is  not  without  reason 
that  these  and  many  other  such  words  and  phrases  are 
listed  in  the  Oxford  Hexateuch  and  elsewhere  as  char- 
acteristics of  the  style  of  the  various  alleged  Docu- 
ments. It  is  there  expressly  admitted  that  these  arise 
from  the  subject  under  discussion  (Oxford  Hexateuch 
I  p.  183).  But  the  distinguished  collaborators  on  the 
Oxford  Hexateuch  felt  the  necessity  of  keeping  these 
words  as  characteristics  of  the  style  of  that  part  of  the 
Pentateuch,  and  no  wonder.  In  fact,  it  is  not  the 
"genuine  characteristics"  of  "style"  which  make  the 
difference  between  the  various  divisions  of  the  Penta- 
teuch so  patent,  but  the  multitude  of  these  words  and 
phrases  of  such  frequent  use,  which  arise  not  in  any 
sense  from  any  peculiarity  of  the  author's  style,  but 
wholly  from  the  subject  and  the  purpose.  While  these 
words  and  phrases  are  not  marks  of  the  author's  style, 
for  any  other  author,  writing  on  the  same  subject, 
would  use  them,  they  do  greatly  help  to  differentiate 
the  literary  production  from  any  other,  even  by  the 
same  author.  The  admission  of  these  words  into  the 
lists  of  evidence  for  style  and  the  implied  acknowledg- 
ment that  they  are  of  such  very  great  frequency  (Ox- 
ford Hexateuch,  I,  pp.  183-4)  is  in  reality  a  betrayal 
of  the  weakness  of  the  argument  for  the  Documentary 
Theory  drawn  from  the  style  of  the  various  supposed 
authors.  If  there  had  been  a  great  and  sufficient  num-' 
ber  of  "genuine  characteristics  of  style,"  does  any  one 
suppose  for  a  moment  that  these  admittedly  not 
"genuine  characteristics,"  but  arising  out  of  subject 
and  circumstances,  would  have  been  lugged  in  to  swell 
the  volume  and  impressiveness  of  the  lists?     Since  it 


FIFTH    INVESTIGATION  ISl 

is  these  words  and  phrases  arising  from  the  subject 
and  the  purpose  which  so  patently  differentiate  the 
divisions  of  the  Pentateuch  rather  than  the  "genuine 
characteristics  of  style"  and  are  included  here  in  the 
Oxford  lists  to  that  end,  there  is  then  no  argument 
here  for  different  authors  at  all.  One  author  would 
find  occasion  for  the  use  of  the  same  words  that  arise 
out  of  subject  and  purpose,  just  as  much  as  various 
authors.  Yet  the  Oxford  Hexateuch  cites  them  to  dif- 
ferentiate the  Documents  by  the  voluminiousness  and 
impressiveness  of  the  evidence,  at  the  same  time  try- 
ing to  save  logical  consistency  by  discarding  them  by 
a  phrase  in  the  introduction  as  not  "genuine  character- 
istics"!  This  makes  one  think  of  the  man  who  had 
ridden  a  humble,  patient  donkey  near  to  the  crest  of 
the  mountain  and  then  discards  the  beast  that  has 
borne  him  on  the  journey  and  walks  out  on  the  sum- 
mit with  the  air  of  a  successful  mountain  climber. 

Lists  of  some  good  portion  of  these  peculiar  words 
and  phrases  arising  out  of  the  subject,  and  in  some 
measure  from  the  particular  purpose,  of  the  author 
in  the  use  of  that  subject  in  different  parts  of  the 
Pentateuch  (as  the  purpose  of  the  orator  in  Deuter- 
onomy), will  make  clear  how  much  the  subject  and 
these  other  allied  influences  have  to  do  with  differences 
of  diction  in  the  different  parts  of  the  Pentateuch. 
And  the  consecutive  reading  of  the  portions  which  be- 
long to  the  various  divisions  of  the  Pentateuch  will 
incidentally  bring  out  and  emphasize  the  fact  that 
it  is  the  subject  above  everything  else  that  produces 
and  brings  before  our  notice  most  of  the  differences 
of  diction  in  different  parts  of  the  Pentateuch. 

Some  of  the  genuine  characteristics  of  the  author  of 
the  Pentateuch  found  in  all  the  parts  that  represent  his 


182  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

own  style,  and,  also,  some  striking  peculiarities  that 
arrest  the  attention,  and  which  arise,  not  from  the 
peculiar  style  of  the  author,  but  from  the  demands  of 
the  subject  discussed  and  the  purpose  immediately  in 
view  are  as  follows: 

(a)  Genuine  Characteristics  of  Style  of  A  in  "stat- 
ute" portions. 

"An  offering  made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord  (Jehovah) " 
Lev.  VII  :5,  30,  35;  XXIII  :37;  XXIV  :7. 

"Afflict  your  souls,"  Lev.  XVI  :31. 

"Abomination,"  Lev.  XI:12,  13,  20,  23,  41,  42.  Ex- 
ception, Lev.  XX:  13;  a  "judgment." 

"For  a  memorial,"  Ex.  XXVIII  :12,  XXXIX.7,  Lev. 
11:9,  16,  VI:15. 

"Without  blemish,"  Lev.  111:6,  IV  :3,  28,  32,  V:15, 
IX  :3,  XXI  :17,  20,  21,  XXII  :19,  XXIII  :12. 

"Make  an  atonement,"  Ex.  XXX  :10,  Lev.  1:4,  IV: 
26,  31,  35,  V:6,  13,  16,  18,  VI  :7,  VIII  :34,  IX  :7, 
X:17,  XII:7-8,  XIV  :18,  19,  20,  21,  29,  31,  53, 
XV:15,  XVI  :6,  10,  11,  Num.  XV:25. 

"The  stranger,"  Num.  111:38,  XV:14,  15,  26,  29, 
XVI  :40,  XVIII  :7. 

"Number,  numbered,"  Num.  111:39-40,  IV:34,  38, 
41,  42,  44,  45,  46. 

"After  his  kind,"  Lev.  XI:14,  15,  16,  19,  22,  29. 

(b)  Characteristics  of  "statute"   portions   arising 
from  Subject  or  Purpose,  and  representing  A. 

"Tabernacle  of  the  Testimony,"  Ex.  XXXVIII  :21, 
Num.  1:53,  111:7,  8,  25,  38,  IV  :3,  15,  30,  35,  37, 
39,  43,  47. 

"Covenant,"  Ex.  XXXIV  :10,  12,  27,  28. 

"Unclean,"  "uncleanness,"  Lev.  V:2,  3,  VII  :20,  21, 
X:10,  XI:4-5,  6,  7,  8,  24,  25,  26,  27,  29,  31,  32- 
36,  38-40,  43,  47,  XIII  :3,  8,  11,  14,  15,  20,  22, 


FIFTH   INVESTIGATION  183 

36,  45,  46,  51,  55,  59,  XIV  :19,  36,  44-46,  57,  etc. 
"Any  manner,"  "No  manner,"  Lev.  VII  :26,  27,  XI  : 

44,  XIV  :54,  XVII  :10,  XXIII  :31. 
"Tabernacle  of  the  congregation,"  "tent  of  meeting," 

Lev.  VIII  :4,  31,  IX:23,  X:7,  9,  XII  :6,  XIV  :11, 

23,  XVI  :16,  Num.  11:2,  111:7,  8,  25,  38,  IV  :3, 

15,  30,  35,  37,  39,  43,  47,  etc. 

"Jehovah,"  Lev.  XV  :1,  XVIII  :5,  XIX  :3.  24,  XX  :7, 
8,  26,  XXI  :1,  XXII  :3,  15,  16,  18,  21,  22,  XXII: 
27,  XXIII  :8,  9,  11,  16, 18,  20,  26,  36-44,  XXVII: 

16,  23,  26,  28,  32,  34,  Num.  11:33-34,  111:13,  41, 
42,  45,  51,  VI  :8,  16,  17,  20,  24,  25-26,  VII  :3, 
VIII  :11,  IX  :8,  13,  19,  20,  23,  X:33-36,  XI:l-3, 
10,  11,  18,  20,  29,  XII  :2,  8,  13,  14,  XIII  :3,  XIV: 
3,  8,  10,  11,  13,  16,  18,  20,  26,  28,  40,  41,  43,  44, 
XV:22-23,  41,  XVI  :41,  XXII:18-19,  22,  24-28, 
31-32,  XXIII  :3,  XXVI  :65,  XXVIII  :8,  11,  13, 
15-16,  XXIX  :2,  8,  36,  XXX  :3,  5,  8,  XXXI  :3, 
XXXII  :7,  10,  13,  20-23,  and  very  many  other 
places. 

(c)  Characteristics  of  "statute"  portions  arising 
from  the  special  purpose  which  called  for  Descriptive 
language,  representing  A. 

Description  of  the  Tabernacle  and  its  furniture.  For 
the  most  part  one  reference  only  will  be  cited. 

"Give  willingly,"  Ex.  XXV  :2. 

"Pattern,"  Ex.  XXV  :9. 

"Cubit,"  Ex.  XXV  :10. 

"Talent,"  Ex.  XXV  :39. 

"Cunning  Work,"  Ex.  XXVI  :1. 

"Boards,"  Ex.  XXVI  :23. 

"Curtains,"  Ex.  XXVI  :3. 

"Hangings,"  Ex.  XXVII  :9. 

"Various  metals,"  Ex.  XXV  :3. 


184  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

"Embroider,"  Ex.  XXVIII  :39. 

"Hallow,"  Ex.  XXIX  :1. 

"Fine  twined  linen,"  Ex.  XXVI  :1. 

"Various  colors,"  Ex.  XXV:4-5. 

"Ram's  skins,"  Ex.  XXV  :5. 

"Various  precious  stones,"  Ex.  XXV  :7. 

"Shittim  wood,"  Ex.  XXV  :13. 

"Rings,"  Ex.  XXV  :12. 

"Cherubim,"  Ex.  XXV  :18. 

"Wings,"  Ex.  XXV  :20. 

"Knops,"  Ex.  XXV  :36. 

"Needle  work,"  Ex.  XXVII:  16. 

"Bell,"  Ex.  XXVIII  :34. 

"Incense,"  Ex.  XXV  :6. 

"Shew  Bread,"  Ex.  XXV  :30. 

"Altar,"  Ex.  XXVII  :1. 

"Laver,"  Ex.  XXX  :18. 

"Ark,"  Ex.  XXV  :10. 

"Holy"  (place),  Ex.  XXVI :33,  Lev.  VI:16. 

"Most  Holy"   (place),  Ex.  XXVI :33. 

"Glory,"  Ex.  XL:34. 

DESCRIPTION    OF    FESTIVALS 

"Sabbath,"  Ex.  XX:8-11,  XXXI:12-17,  Lev.  XXIII: 

1-3,  Cf.  also  Ex.  XXIII  :10-12,  Lev.  XXV:l-7. 
"New  moon,"  or  "Trumpets,"  Num.  XXVIII  :11-15, 

XXIX  :l-6,  Cf.  Num.  X:10,  XXVIII  :11. 
"Year  of  Jubilee,"  Lev.  XXV:8-17,  XXVII  :16-25. 
"Passover,"  Ex.  XII:l-28,  XXIII :15,  Lev.  XXIII: 

4-8,  Num.  XXVIII  :16-25,  Deut.  XVI  :1. 
"Feasts  of  weeks,"  Ex.  XXXIV  :22,  Lev.  XXIII  :15, 

Num.  XXVIII  :26,  Deut.  XVI:10-12. 
"Day  of  atonement,"  Lev.  XVI:  1-34,  Ex.  XXX:  10. 
"Feast  of  Tabernacles,"  Lev.  XXIII  :34. 


FIFTH   INVESTIGATION  185 

"Holy  convocation,"  a  name  given  to  many  of  these 
festivals. 

DESCRIPTION  OF  SACRIFICES 

"The  burnt  offering,"  "kill,"    Lev.    1:5;    "without 
blemish,"  Lev.  1 :3  j  "hand  upon  the  head,"  Lev. 
1:5:  "flay,"  Lev.  1:6:  "into  his  pieces,"  Lev.  I 
6;  "In  order,"  Lev.  1:7;  "inwards,"  Lev.  1:9 
"sweet  savour,"  Lev.  1:9;  "flocks,"  Lev.  1:10 
"fat,"  Lev.  1 :12.    It  is  to  be  noted  that  all  these 
words  concerning  the  burnt  offering  occur  with- 
in so  few  verses,  thus  making  marked  distinc- 
tion in  the  diction. 

"The  sin  offering,"  Lev.  IV  :3 ;  "bullock,"  Lev.  IV  :4; 
"dip  finger,"  Lev.  IV  :6;  "sprinkle,"  Lev.  IV  :6; 
"horns  of  the  altar,"  Lev.  IV  :7;  "fat,"  Lev. 
IV  :8;  "without  the  camp,"  Lev.  IV:12;  "ashes," 
Lev.  IV  :12 ;  "kid  of  the  goats,"  Lev.  IV  :23. 

"The  peace  offering,"  Lev.  111:1;  "kidneys,"  Lev. 
111:4,  10. 

"Trespass,"  "trespass  offering,"  Lev.  VI  :2,  5. 

"Meat  offering,"  Lev.  VI:  14;  "sweet  savour,"  Lev. 
VI:15;  "bake,"  Lev.  VI:17;  "leaven,"  Lev. 
VI:17. 

"Heave  offering,"  Num.  XVIII:  19;  Cf.  Lev.  XXII: 
10,  also  Ex.  XXV  :2. 

"Wave  offering,"  Lev.  VII  :30,  Ex.  XXIX  :26. 

"Scape-goat,"  Lev.  XVI:7-28. 

DESCRIPTION  OF  CEREMONIES 

Atonement;  "present  before  the  Lord,"  "presented 
alive  before  the  Lord,"  "within  the  vail,"  "in- 
cense upon  the  fire  before  the  Lord,"  "make 
atonement,"  "upon  the  horns  of  the  altar,"  "live 


186  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

goat,"  "into  a  land  not  inhabited,"  Lev.  XVI. 
Consecration     of    Aaron    and    his     sons;     "coat," 

"girdle,"      "robe,"      "girded,"      "breastplate," 

"anointing-oil,"  "sanctify,"  Lev.  VIIL 
Setting  up  of  the  Tabernacle ;  "set,"  "set  in  order," 

"hangings,"    "anoint,"    "spread    abroad,"    Ex. 

XL. 
Making  camp;  "pitch  by  own  standard,"  "far  off 

about  the  Tabernacle,"  "the  standard  of,"  "pitch 

next  unto  him,"  "standard    of   the    camp    of," 

"numbered  of  them,"  Num.  11:1-16. 
Forming  the  march;  "set  forward,"  "on  the  west 

side,  north  side,  etc.,"  "that  were  numbered," 

"encamped  by,"  Num.  11:17-34. 
The  testing  of  the  rods;  "a  rod  apiece,"  "laid  up," 

budded,"  "brought  forth  buds,"  "every  man  his 

rod,"  Num.  XVII  :6-9. 

DESCRIPTION  OF  THE  VESTMENTS 

The  robe  of  the  High  Priest;  "hole  in  the  midst," 

"hems  of  the  robe,"  Ex.  XXXIX  :22-26. 
Tha  ephod ;  "thin  plates,"  "wires,"  "cunning  work," 

"shoulder    pieces,"    "to    couple    it,"    "curious 

girdle,"  Ex.  XXXIX  :l-5. 
The   breast-plate;    "cunning   work,"    "foursquare," 

"rows,"  "wreathen,"  "work,"  Ex.  XXXIX  :8-21. 
The  miter;  Lev.  VIII :9. 

FLORID  DESCRIPTION  OF  A  GENERAL  CHARACTER 

"Waste  howling  wilderness,"  Deut.  XXXII:  10. 
"As  the  eagle  stirreth  up  her  nest,  fluttereth  over  her 

young,  etc.,"  Deut.  XXII  :11. 
Description  of  the  symptoms  of  leprosy.  Lev.  XIII. 
Description  of  clean  and  unclean  beasts;  "parteth 


FIFTH    INVESTIGATION  187 

the  hoof,"  "cloven  footed,"  "cheweth  the  cud," 
Lev.  XI:3-7;  "fins  and  scales,"  Lev.  XI:9-10; 
names  of  birds,  Lev.  XI:  13-19;  "flying  creeping 
thing  that  goeth  upon  all  four,"  Lev.  XI :  21-23 ; 
"paws,"  Lev.  XI  :27. 

(d)  Characteristics  of  style  in  the  "judgment"  por- 
tions of  the  Pentateuch,  arising  out  of  subject  and  pur- 
pose and  not  representing  A. 

In  the  "judgment"  portions  of  the  Pentateuch  there 
are  a  multitude  of  words  and  phrases  denoting 
crimes  and  penalties  and  personal  and  property 
rights  and  wrongs.  These  all  arise  out  of  the 
subject  and  the  purpose,  and  while  they  greatly 
affect  the  diction  and  so  the  general  qualities 
of  style  and  more  than  anything  else  give  char- 
acteristic literary  tone  to  these  portions,  and 
make  them  to  appear  so  different  from  the 
"statute  portions,"  yet  indicate  nothing  what- 
ever concerning,  the  Author.  Any  author  writ- 
ing on  these  subjects  and  with  the  same  pur- 
pose would  use  these  words  and  phrases.  It 
will  be  sufficient  to  mention  a  few  of  the  vast 
number  of  these  expressions,  as  follows: 

"Life  for  life,"  Ex.  XXI  :23. 

"Oath  of  the  Lord,"  Ex.  XXII  :11. 

"If,"  introducing  a  penalty  for  crime.  Lev.  XXII : 
14-17 ;  this  same  formulary  is  most  frequent  in 
the  Code  of  Khammurabi. 

"Smite,"  Ex.  XXI  :12,  18,  20,  26,  27. 

"Shall  surely  die,"  Ex.  XXI:  15  and  many  places. 

"Presumptuously,"  Ex.  XXI  :14. 

"Guile,"  Ex.  XXI  :14. 

"Stealth,"  Ex.  XXI  :16,  XXII  :1. 

"Curseth,"  Ex.  XXI  :17,  XXII  :28. 


188  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

"Punish,"  Ex.  XXI  :20,  22. 

"Strive,"  Ex.  XXI  :22. 

"Ransom,"  Ex.  XXI  :30. 

"Thief,"  Ex.  XXII  :2. 

"Restitution,"  Ex.  XXII  :5-6. 

"Entice,"  Ex.  XXII:  16. 

"Lie  with,"  Ex.  XXII:19. 

"Afflict,"  Ex.  XXII  :22. 

"Lend,"  Ex.  XXII  :25. 

"Usurer,"  "usury,"  Ex.  XXII  :25. 

Concerning  all  these  peculiar  characteristics  of  dic- 
tion in  the  various  portions  of  the  Pentateuch  it  may- 
be said,  "Of  course  these  words  and  phrases  occur  in 
these  various  portions  of  the  Pentateuch  because  they 
are  severally  needed  in  order  to  discuss  the  several 
subjects  of  the  various  portions  and  to  serve  the  pur- 
poses in  view."  Yes,  "of  course" ;  they  are  not  needed 
to  discuss  the  subjects  treated  in  the  other  portions  of 
the  Pentateuch  or  to  serve  the  purposes  in  mind  there, 
which  is  simply  to  say  that  the  subject  and  the  purpose 
each  has  very  much  to  do  with  the  diction  and  it  is 
such  frequent  recurrence  of  such  peculiarities  of  dic- 
tion that  more  than  anything  else  makes  the  peculiar 
and  most  patent  difference  between  one  portion  of  the 
Pentateuch  and  another,  and  which  difference  has 
been  attributed  to  the  peculiarities  of  different  authors. 
These  are  the  peculiarities  and  not  those  which  men 
pick  up  so  carefully  and  list  as  marks  of  authorship, 
which  really  impress  the  reader  of  the  various  so- 
called  documents  of  the  Pentateuch.  That  they  do 
make  greatly  different  impressions  on  the  mind  of  the 
reader  cannot  be  denied,  does  not  need  to  be  denied, 
and  moreover  it  is  these  glaring  and  most  manifest  dif- 
ferences that  make  the  impression  and  not  the  subtle 


FIFTH    INVESTIGATION  189 

distinctions  that  have  to  be  sought  so  painstakingly  by 
critics  and  are  never  observed  by  the  reader  at  all  until 
pointed  out  in  the  lists  of  "marks  of  authorship"  as 
proofs  of  the  various  Documents. 

It  is  now  possible  to  assemble  the  vast  materials  of 
this  investigation  in  such  fashion  as  to  observe  clearly 
and  with  accuracy  the  harmoniousness  of  Style  and 
Diction  in  the  several  divisions  of  the  Pentateuch  ac- 
cording to  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws,  and  to  determine 
whether  or  not  the  harmoniousness  is  such  as  to  satisfy 
all  the  requirements  of  the  division  on  the  supposition 
that  it  is  correct,  and  thus  answer  the  question  with 
which  this  Fifth  investigation  set  out. 

There  is  first  of  all  that  general  harmoniousness  in 
the  divisions  according  to  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws 
which  the  various  kinds  and  several  uses  demand ;  th9 
"judgment"  portions  are  uniformly  of  the  same  terse,! 
succinct,  literary  character;  the  "statutory"  portions 
are  equally  uniformly  in  the  more  florid,  verbose,  de- 
scriptive style;  the  different  laws  are  well  adapted  to 
the  various  uses  for  which  they  were  intended,  the 
"judgments"  to  be  memorized  and  the  "statutes"  to  be 
used  as  written  directions  to  be  studied  and  followed 
by  the  priests;  and  further,  the  second  law,  Deuter- 
onomy, is  admirably  adapted  to  the  hortatory  use  for 
which  it  was  intended. 

There  is  likewise  most  manifest  harmoniousness 
throughout  the  various  passages  representing  the 
various  classes  of  diction  employed  in  the  different 
KINDS  of  laws  for  the  various  USES  to  which  they 
were  put.  Not  only  is  there  to  be  found  those  "genu- 
ine marks"  pointed  out  in  the  corresponding  divisions 
of  the  Documentary  Theory,  characteristics  which  do 
distinguish  the  Statutory  portions,  the  so-called  P  Doc- 


190  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

ument  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  ''judgment"  portions, 
the  so-called  JE  Document  on  the  other  hand,  but  in 
addition  there  is  the  vast  number  of  expressions  aris- 
ing, not  from  authorship,  but  wholly  from  subject  and 
purpose.  There  is  thus  the  harmoniousness  of  Style 
throughout,  or  as  better  stated,  that  uniform  appro- 
priateness in  the  Style  and  Diction  of  the  various 
divisions  that  satisfies  every  reasonable  literary  de- 
mand. 

Last  of  all,  A,  the  author  of  the  Pentateuch  accord- 
ing to  the  division  according  to  KINDS  and  USES  of 
laws,  is  completely  harmonious  throughout  as  an 
author ;  the  "statute"  portions  manifesting  an  unvary- 
ing literary  uniformity,  and  the  narrative  portions 
which,  also,  are  by  him,  bearing  the  same  general 
literary  characteristics,  just  as,  indeed,  it  is  claimed 
for  the  P  Document  which  represents,  in  its  entirety, 
the  same  portions  of  the  Pentateuch.  Thus  A  is  seen, 
in  the  various  particular  portions  of  the  Pentateuch, 
to  be  entirely  consistent  with  himself  in  literary  char- 
acteristics. The  "judgment"  portions,  the  so-called  JE 
Document,  are  equally  consistently  harmonious  in  Style 
and  Diction  and  consistently  different,  also,  from  the 
portions  which  should  properly  bear  the  literary  marks 
of  A. 

Thus,  in  every  respect,  the  harmoniousness  and  con- 
sistency in  Style  and  Diction  in  the  divisions  accord- 
ing to  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws  is  just  what  should 
properly  be  expected.  And  thus,  also,  the  division  of 
the  Pentateuch  according  to  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws 
does  completely  answer  the  question  with  which  this 
Fifth  investigation  sets  out,  whether  or  not  such 
divisions  were  sufficient  to  account  for  the  differences 
of  Style  and  Diction  actually  found  in  the  various  parts 
of  the  Pentateuch. 


Chapter  VI 
SIXTH  INVESTIGATION 

Complete  Examination  of  the  Technical  Use  of 

These  Law  Words  in  All  the  Remaining 

Books  of  the  Old  Testament 

Examination  of  the  technical  use  of  these  law  words 
in  the  law  books  being  now  completed,  another  ques- 
tion naturally  arises  immediately  for  investigation ;  Is 
the  technical  use  of  these  law  words  found  elsewhere 
in  the  Old  Testament,  and  if  so,  where?  This  is  not 
purely  an  academic  question,  much  less  a  question  of 
vain  curiosity.  It  is  evident  in  advance  that  the 
answer  to  this  question  may  present  an  historical  test 
of  the  correctness  of  the  solution  of  the  Problem  of  the 
Pentateuch  which  has  been  now  presented  as  well  as  an 
additional  test  of  the  Documentary  Theory,  or  it  may 
not  present  such  tests  at  all.  The  outcome  depends 
upon  what  the  investigation  shall  show.  If  the  techni- 
cal use  of  these  law  words  is  found  nowhere  else  in  the 
Old  Testament,  such  use  in  the  Pentateuch  will  be  the 
more  significant;  if  it  be  found  equally  everywhere 
throughout  the  Old  Testament  it  will  still  be  signifi- 
cant, but  not  so  strikingly  so;  if  the  technical  use  is 
found  in  some  parts  of  the  Old  Testament  and  not  in 
others  it  may  conceivably  favor  the  Documentary 
Theory  or  may  prove  entirely  neutral  in  its  signifi- 
cance.   We  shall  see  what  we  shall  see. 

191 


192  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

The  complete  answer  to  the  questioh  proposed  in 
this  investigation  involves  the  examination  of  every 
passage  in  the  remaining  books  of  the  Old  Testament 
in  which  these  technical  law  words  are  used  and  the 
classification  of  the  different  senses  in  which  the 
words  are  used  in  the  various  instances.  To  this  task 
let  us  now  proceed. 

I.  GENESIS 

1.  Judgments. 

A.  Technical  use;  no  instances. 

B.  Common  or  general  sense  of  "judging"  or  "ren- 

dering judgment,"  XVIII  :19. 

C.  In  the  sense  of  "judging  right,"  XVIII  :25. 

D.  In  the  sense  of  "manner,"  XL:  13. 

2.  Statutes. 

A.  In  the  technical  sense,  no  instances. 

B.  In  the  same  sense  as  that  in  the  technical  use  of 

the  word,  but  without  reference  to  any  partic- 
ular law,  XXVI  :5  khuqqah,  XLVII:26,  khoq. 

C.  In  the  sense  of  "portion,"  XLVII  :22   (2),  khoq. 

3.  Commandments. 


No  instances. 


n.  JOB 


1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  sense,  no  instances. 

B.  In  the  sense  of  "just  conduct,"  VIII  :3 ;  joined 

with  "justice"  in  the  poetic  parallel. 

C.  "Judging"  IX:19,  32;  XVI  :3,  XXII  :4,  XXIX  :14, 

XXXIV  :23;  XXXVI  :17    (2);  XXXVII  :23. 

D.  "Cause"   (AV),  XIII  :18,  XXIII  :4;  XXXI  :13. 

E.  In  the  sense  of  "judicial  action,"  XIV  :3;  XIX  :7, 


SIXTH    INVESTIGATION  193 

XXXII  :9,  XXXIV  :5,  XXXIV  :12. 
F.  "Right,"   (AV),  XXVII  :2,  XXXIV  :6,  XXXV  :2, 
XXXVI  :6,  XL:8. 

2.  Statutes. 

A.  Technical  meaning  and  use,  no  instances. 

B.  In  the  same  sense  as  the  technical  meaning  of  the 

word,  but  with  no  reference  to  the  Law,  khoq, 
XIV  :5,  13;  XXIII  :12,  14;  XXVI  :10;  XXVIII: 
20;  XXXVIII  :10;  khuqqah,  XXXVIII  :33. 

C.  "Portion,"  khoq,  XXIII  :2. 

3.  Commandments. 

A.  In  the  technical  sense  and  use,  no  instances. 

B.  In  the  general  sense,  XXIII  :12. 

III.  JOSHUA 

1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  sense,  XXIV  :25  ( ?) ,  and  in  the 

technical  use,  but  not  in  reference  to  the  "judg- 
ments" of  the  Pentateuch,  but  rather  to  a  new 
law  as  both  a  "statute"  and  a  "judgment." 

B.  In  the  sense  of  "judging,"  or  acting  the  part  of  a 

judge,  XX  :6. 

C.  "Manner,"  with  k,  VI:15. 

2.  Statutes. 

A.  In  the  technical  sense  and  use,  khoq,  XXIV  :25, 
but  not  with  reference  to  any  law  of  the  Penta- 
teuch, but  rather  to  a  new  law,  a  "statute." 

3.  Commandments, 

A.  In  the  technical  sense  and  use,  XXII  :5. 

B.  In  general  sense,  XXII  :3. 

rV.  JUDGES 

1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 


194  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

B.  "Judging,"  "rendering  judgment,"  IV:15. 

C.  "Manner,"  XIII  :12,  XVIII  :7. 

2.  Statutes. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 

B.  Same  sense  as  the  technical  meaning,  but  with- 

out reference  to  the  Law  and  translated  "cus- 
tom" in  AV,  khoq,  XI  :39. 

3.  Commandments. 

A.  In  the  technical  sense  and  use  probably  III  :4. 

B.  General  sense,  11:17. 


V.   RUTH 


Judgments. 
No  instances. 
Statutes. 
No  instances. 
Commandments. 
No  instances. 


VI.  I  SAMUEL 


1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  no  instances. 

B.  In  the  technical  sense,  but  not  the  technical  use 

of  the  word,  XXX  :25.  This  passage  makes  no 
reference  to  the  Law,  but  clearly  reveals  a 
knowledge  of  the  distinction  between  "judg- 
ments" and  "statutes."     Cf.  below.  Statues,  B. 

C.  "Judging,"  VII  :3. 

D.  "Manner,"  (AV),  VIII :9,  11;  X:25. 

E.  "Custom,"  (AV),  11:13. 

2.  Statutes. 

A.  In  the  technical  sense  and  use;  no  instances. 

B.  In  the  technical  sense,  but  not  the  technical  use 

of  the  word,  khoq,  XXX  :25,  with  no  reference 


SIXTH  INVESTIGATION  195 

to  the  Law,  but  clearly  betraying  the  knowledge 
of    the    technical    distinction    between    "judg- 
ments"   and    "statutes."      Cf.    above,    Judg- 
ments, B. 
3.  Commandments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 

B.  In  the  general  sense,  XIII:  13. 

VII.    II  SAMUEL 

1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  XXII  :23.  This 

passage  has  apparently  the  technical  meaning 
and  use  of  the  word  "judgment,"  but  it  is  one 
of  the  Davidic  Psalms  and  the  further  use  of 
this  word  in  the  Davidic  Psalms  does  not  war- 
rant the  classing  of  this  as  an  instance  of  the 
technical  meaning  and  use  of  the  word,  or  of 
the  word  "statutes"  accompanying.  Cf.  the 
word  "judgments"  in  the  Psalms. 

B.  "Judging,"  VIII  :15. 

C.  Judical  decision,  XV  :2,  XV  :6. 

2.  Statutes. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  XXII  :23.  Cf. 
above,  "judgment." 

3.  Commandments. 
No  instances. 

VIII.    I  KINGS 

1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  VI:  12  (with 
statutes  and  commandments),  IX  :4;  VI:12,  in 
each  case  in  a  distinct  message  from  God.  There 
is  no  indication  from  the  literature  of  the  time 
that  the  people  knew  and  made  use  of  this  dis- 


196  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

tinction  in  the  technical  use  of  words.  II  :3,  from 
the  words  of  David  also  makes  use  of  the 
formula  "statutes,  commandments,  judgments 
and  testimonies,"  but  most  probably  in  the  same 
way  as  the  formula  is  used  in  the  Davidic 
Psalms,  where  the  technical  distinction  is  not 
observed  (Cf.  X,  Psalms).  Perhaps  it  would 
be  more  correct  to  class  all  these  instances  of 
the  use  of  the  word  "judgments"  as, 

B.  In  the  technical  meaning,  but  not  technical  use 

of  the  word,  i.e.  with  no  specific  reference  to 
the  Law. 

C.  Judging  right,  111:11,  28  (2),  X:9. 

D.  "Cause"  (AV),  VIII  :45,  49,  59. 

E.  Sentence,  XX:40. 

F.  "Charge"   (AV),  IV:28   (Heb.  V:8). 

G.  "Manner"  (AV),  XVIII :28. 

H.  "Fashion"  (AV),  or  "ordinances"  (RV  margin) 
VI  :38,  with  no  reference  to  the  law. 

2.  Statutes. 

A.  In  technical  meaning  and  use,  khuqqah,  III  :3, 14 ; 
VIII  :58,  VI:12;  IX  :4,  6;  XI:11,  33,  38;  VI  :^. 
(Cf.  above,  "judgments,"  A). 

3.  Commandments. 

A.  In  the  technical  sense  and  use,  11:3;  111:14;  VI: 

12 ;  VIII  :58,  61 ;  IX  :6 ;  XI  :34,  38 ;  XIV  :8,  prob- 
ably (Cf.  above,  "judgments,"  A,  and  "stat- 
utes," A).  Also  XVIII :18  probably  in  the 
technical  sense  and  use. 

B.  In  the  general  sense,  II  :43,  XIII  :21. 

IX.     II    KINGS 

1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  XVII  :34,  37. 


SIXTH   INVESTIGATION  197 

The  technical  meaning  of  the  word  seems  plain 
enough,  but  it  is  not  at  all  certain  that  it  has,  in 
these  cases,  the  technical  use,  i.e.  that  its  use  is 
any  more  than  a  quotation  of  the  Law  term 
found  in  the  Pentateuch. 

B.  "Judging,"  XXV  :6. 

C.  "Manner,"    (AV)    1:7;  XI:14   (with  k),  XVII: 

26  (2),  27,  33,  34,  40. 

2.  Statutes. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  khuqqah,  XVII : 

13,  34,  37  (Cf.  above,  "judgments,"  A). 

B.  An  appointed  regulation,  but  not  a  reference  to 

the  Law  of  Israel,  khuqqah,  XVII  :8. 

3.  Commandments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  XVII:  13,  34, 

37  (Cf.  above,  "judgments,"  A).  XVII:16-17, 
probably  XVIII  :6;  XXIII  :3. 

B.  In  the  general  sense  XVII  :34,  37.    Though  men- 

tioned with  "statutes"  and  "judgments"  in  the 
technical  sense  "commandments"  seems  evident- 
ly used  as  "law"  which  immediately  precedes  it. 
XVII  :37. 

X.    PSALMS 

The  Psalms  were  written  by  various  persons  from 
David  onward  to  the  time  of  the  return  from  Exile  and 
were  probably  collected  into  their  present  order  and 
form  in  the  days  of  Ezra  and  under  his  supervision. 
The  whole  collection  as  it  now  stands  will  be  examined 
at  this  time  for  the  technical  use  of  the  law  words,  and 
the  discussion  of  the  significance  of  the  instances  of 
such  use  in  the  various  Psalms  reserved  for  the  final 
estimate  of  the  significance  of  the  results  of  this  in- 


198  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

vestigation  throughout  all  the  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. 
1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  apparently  in 

XVIII  :22  (Heb.  23)  Cf.  II  Sam.  XXII, 
CXLVII  :19.  Possibly  also  X  :5,  though  this  use 
of  the  word  seems  rather  to  refer  to  God's 
righteous  requirements,  but  not  to  the  law 
specifically. 

B.  In  the  technical  meaning,  but  not  use,  i.e.  with- 

out any  reference  to  the  Law,  IX:  16  (Heb.  27), 
IX  :8,  XXV  :9;  LXXVI:9  (Heb.  11)  ;  CXLIX:9, 
CXIX:175;  CXXII:5. 

C.  "Judging,"  VII  :6  (Heb.  7),  XCIV:15,  CXIX:84. 

D.  Right  Judging,  XXXVII  :28;  XCIX:4  (2)  ;  CVI: 

3,  synonomous  with  righteousness,  CXIX:121; 
CXLVI  :7 ;  LXXII  :2, 1 :5 ;  XXXIII  :5,  LXXXIX : 
14  (Heb.  15),  XCVII:2;  XXXVII  :6;  CXIX: 
149;  CXIX:43,  CI:1;  CXI:7;  CXIX:160, 
(Poetic  parallel,  "word"),  CIII:69,  XIX  :9 
(Heb.  10),  (Poetic  parallel,  "fear"),  CV:5, 
XXXVI:6  (Heb.  7),  XLVIII:11  (Heb.  12); 
LXXII  :1;  XCVIIiS,  CXIX:108,  156,  91,  102, 
120,  CV:7. 

E.  Discretion,     parallel,     "wisdom,"     XXXVII  :30; 

CXII:5. 

F.  Custom,  "manner,"  with  "k,"  CXIX:  132. 

G.  "Right"     (AV),     CXL:12     (Heb.     13);     IX:4 

(Heb.  5). 
H.  "Sentence"  (AV),  XVII :2. 
L    Cause,  parallel,  "cause"  (AV)  XXXV  :23,  (with 

"6"). 
J.    In  general  reference  to  God's  law,  CXIX:7,  13, 

62,  108,  164;  LXXXIX  :30  (Heb.  31). 


SIXTH  INVESTIGATION  199 

2.  Statutes. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  khoq,  CXLVII: 

19,  khuqqah,  LXXXIX:31  (Heb.  32),  XVIII: 
22  (Heb.  23). 

B.  "Decree"  (AV),  khoq  11:7,  CXLVIII:6. 

C.  Divine  direction ;  technical  meaning,  but  not  use 

(i.e.  no  specific  reference  to  the  Pentateuch)  ; 
khoq,  LXXX:4  (Heb.  5);  XCIX:7;  L:16; 
CXIX:5,  8,  12,  26,  33,  54,  64,  68,  71,  83,  112, 
135,  145,  155,  171,  23,  48,  80,  117,  124,  118;  CV: 
45,  khuqqah,  CXIX:16.  (Usage  of  Psalm 
CXIX  with  its  frequent  use  of  the  words 
mishpatim  and  khoq  does  not  indicate  any  tech- 
nical use  of  these  words). 

D.  "Law"  (AV),  khoq,  XCIV:20;  CV:10  (Parallel, 

"covenant"). 

3.  Commandments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  LXXXIX:31 

(Heb.  32). 

B.  In  the  general  sense,  XIX  :8  (Heb.  9)  ;  CXIX:96, 

115,  6,  19,  32,  35,  48,  60,  73,  86,  98,  127,  143, 
151,  172,  176,  47,  66,  166,  131,  10,  21;  CXII:1; 
LXXVIII:7. 

XI.   PROVERBS 

1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 

B.  "Righteousness,"  Decision  11:8;  VIII  :20,  XVI  :10 

(Heb.  11). 

C.  "Right"  (AV),  XII :5;  XVI :8. 

D.  Good  judgment,  XIII  :23. 

E.  Judical  decision,  but  not  in  the  technical  use, 

XVIII  :5;  XVII  :23. 


200  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

F.  Right     judging,     XIX  :28;     XXI  :7;     XXI  :15; 

XXVIII  :5;  XXIX  :4,  1:3;  11:9;  XXI  :3. 

G.  Judging,  XVI  :10;  XXIV  :23. 
H.  Final  outcome,  XXIX  :26. 

2.  Statutes. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 

B.  "Portion"  (AV),  A;/iog,  XXXI:15. 

C.  "Decree"  (AV),  khoq,  VIII  :29. 

3.  Commandments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 

B.  In  the  general  sense,  VI:23;  XIII  :13;  XIX  :16; 

VI:20;  X:8;  IV:4;  VII:2;   11:1;  111:1;  VII: 
1  (2). 

Xn.    ECCLESIASTES 

1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 

B.  Judging,  V:8   (Heb.  7),  111:16. 

C.  Judical  action,  XII  :14;  XI  :9;  VIII  :5,  6. 

2.  Statutes. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 

3.  Commandments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 

B.  In  the  general  sense,  VIII  :5;  XII  :13. 

Xni.    SONG  OF  SOLOMON 

1.  Judgments. 

No  instances  of  the  use  of  this  word. 

2.  Statutes. 

No  instances. 

3.  Commandments. 
No  instances. 


XIV.    JONAH 


1.  Judgments. 

No  instances. 


SIXTH   INVESTIGATION  201 


2.  Statutes. 

No  instances. 

3.  Commandments. 
No  instances. 


XV.     JOEL 


1.  Judgments. 

No  instances. 

2.  Statutes. 

No  instances. 

3.  Commandments. 
No  instances. 

XVI.    AMOS 

1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 

B.  Right  judging,  V:7,  15,  24;  VI:12. 

2.  Statutes. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 

B.  "Commandments"   (AV),  khoq,  11:4. 

3.  Commandments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 

XVII.     HOSEA 

1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 

B.  Right  judging,  11:19    (Heb.  21);  XII  :6    (Heb. 

7);  VI:5. 

C.  Judgment  upon  a  man,  V:l;  X:4. 

D.  Demonstration  of  justice,  V:ll. 

2.  Statutes. 

No  instances  of  the  use  of  the  word. 

3.  Commandments. 

No  instances  of  the  use  of  the  word. 


202  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

XVin.    ISAIAH 

1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  XXVI  :8,  seem- 

ingly in  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  though 
this  sense  of  the  word  here  is  not  in  accord  with 
the  frequent  use  of  the  word  throughout  Isaiah. 

B.  Right  judging,  1:17,  21;  XVI:5;  XXVIII  :6  (2)  ; 

XLII:1,  3,  4;  XXXVI :1;  LIX:14,  15;  IX:7;  V: 
7;  LIV:17;  LIII:8;  X:2;  XLIX:4;  LI:4. 

C.  Calamity,  IV  :4. 

D.  Righteousness,    XXVIII  :17,    XXX  :18;   XXXII: 

16;  XXXIII  :5;  1:27;  XXXII  :1. 

E.  "Right"   (AV),  XXXII  :7. 

F.  Right  conduct,  XL:  14;  LIX:8;  LXI:8. 

G.  Judgment  upon  evil,   111:14,  XXIV  :5;   XL:27; 

XXVI  :9. 
H.  Judging,  V:16;  XLI:1. 
I.    Discretion  (AV),  XXVIII :26. 
J.    Criticising,  condemnation,  LIV:17. 
K.  "Ordinances"  (AV),  LVIII  :2  (2). 
L.  "Cause"  (AV  margin),  L:8. 

2.  Statutes. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 

B.  "Measure"  (AV),  khoq,  V:14. 

C.  "Ordinance"  (AV),  khoq,  XXIV :5. 

3.  Commandments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 

B.  In  the  general  sense,  XXIX  :13  (AV  "precepts"), 

XXXVI  :21;  XLVIII:18. 

XIX.    MICAH 

1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 


SIXTH   INVESTIGATION  203 

B.  Right  judging,  111:9;  VI  :8;  111:1;  VII  :9. 

C.  Judgment  upon  man,  111:8. 

2.  Statutes. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 

B.  "Decree"  (AV),  Mo^,  VII:11. 

C.  Laws,  khuqqah,  VI:  16. 

3.  Commandments. 
No  instances. 

XX.    NAHUM 

1.  Judgments. 

No  instances  of  the  use  of  this  word. 

2.  Statutes. 

No  instances. 

3.  Commandments. 
No  instances. 

XXI.    ZEPHANIAH 

1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 

B.  Right  judging,  111:5. 

C.  Judgment  upon  man,  111:15. 

D.  Decision,  "determination"  (AV),  111:8. 

E.  Requirement,  11:3. 

2.  Statutes. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 

B.  "Decree"  (AV),  khoq,  11:2. 

3.  Commandments. 
No  instances. 

XXIII.    JEREMIAH  AND  LAMENTATIONS 

Specific  references  to  the  Law  or  to  the  wilderness 
sojourn  during  which  the  Law  was  given  are 
found  at  Jer.  11:1-3,  4-8;  VII:22-26;  IX:13; 
XI:l-5. 


204  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 

B.  Right  judging,   Jer.  V:l;  VII :5;  IX:24    (Heb. 

23)  ;  XXI  :12 ;  XXII  :3 ;  IV  :2  ("In  truth,  in  judg- 
ment, and  in  righteousness");  XXX.ll;  1:16; 
XLVI  :28,  in  the  sense  of  "wise  measures" ;  V : 
4,5. 

C.  Righteousness,  XXII  :13,  14;  XXIII  :5. 

D.  Reasonableness,  X:24. 

E.  "Right"     (AV),  XVII :11;    XXXII :7-8;    V:28; 

Lam.  111:35. 

F.  Calamity,  XLVIII:21;  LI:9;  XLIX:12,  XII  :1. 

G.  Law  of  God,  VIII  :7. 

H.  "Worthy"  (AV),  XXVI :11,  16. 

I.    Doom  pronounced,  XLVIII:47. 

J.    "Manner"  (AV),  XXX :18. 

K.  "Sentence"  (AV),  IV:12;  Cf.  XXXIX :5;  LII:9; 

1:16. 
L.  "Cause"  (AV),  Lamentations,  111:59. 

2.  Statutes. 

A.  In    the    technical    meaning    and    use    khuqqah, 

XLIV  :10,  23.  The  reference  is  to  the  "statutes" 
of  the  Pentateuch,  but,  considering  the  general 
use  of  this  word  by  Jeremiah,  it  is  doubtful  if 
it  is  here  consciously  used  in  the  technical  sense. 

B.  "Decree"  (AY),  khoq,Y :22. 

C.  "Ordinance"   (AV),  khoq,  XXXI :36   (Heb.  35). 

D.  "Custom"  (AY),  khoq,  XXXII  ill,  khuqqah,  X:3. 

E.  "Appointed"  (AV),  khuqqah,  V:24. 

F.  "Ordinances"      (AV),      khuqqah,     XXXIII :25; 

XXXI  :35  (Heb.  34). 

3.  Commandments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 

B.  In    general    sense,    XXXII :11,     ("Law,"    AV), 

XXXV  :14,  16,  18. 


SIXTH   INVESTIGATION  205 

XXIV.  OBEDIAH 

1.  Judgments. 

No  instances  of  the  use  of  this  word. 

2.  Statutes. 

No  instances, 

3.  Commandments. 
No  instances. 

XXV.  EZEKIEL 

1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  XVIII  :19,  21, 

apparently,  XXIII  :24,  XLIV:24,  XX:24;  V:7; 
XI:12;  V:6  (2),  7;  XI:20;  XVIII  :17;  XX:11, 
13,  16,  19,  21,  24;  XXXVII  :24;  XI:12;  XVIII: 
19,  XXXVI  :27,  XX:19,  XXIII  :24. 

B.  Justice,  XVIII  :5,  27;  XXXIII  :14,  16,  19;  XXIII: 

24;  XLV:9. 

C.  Right   (AV  margin),  XXII :29;  XXI :27    (Heb. 

32). 

D.  Right  judging,  XVIII  :8;  XXXIX  :21;  XVI  :38; 

XLIV:24. 

E.  Judging,  XLIV:24. 

F.  "Crime"  (AV),  VII :27. 

G.  "Manner"   (AV),  XXIII :45   (2). 

H.  Laws  of  the  nature  of  "judgments,"  but  not  of 
those  in  the  Pentateuch.  V:7.  The  second  in- 
stance of  the  word  in  this  verse,  XX:18. 

I.    Calamity,  V:8,  10. 

J.    "Deserts"  (AV),  VII :27. 

K.  "Fashions"   (AV),  XLIIrll. 

2.  Statutes. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  khoq,  XLV:14, 
probably  the  technical  use  of  the  word  in  accord 
with  the  usage  of  Ezekiel  ("ordinance"  in  AV). 


206  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

XX  :25,  18,  technical  sense,  but  in  contrast  with 
the    Pentateuchal    laws.      XI:12;    XXXVI  :27 
khuqqah  "ordinances"  (AV),  XLIII:18;  XLIV 
5;  XLVI:14;  V:6  (2)  ;  XVIII  :17;  XX:16;  XX 
11,  XLIV:24;  V:7;  XVIII  :9;  XX:13,  19;  XX 
21;  XI:20;  XXVII  :24;  XX:11. 

B.  "Ordinary"  allowances,  khoq,  XVI  :27. 

C.  The  general   sense  of  laws,   "statutes"  of  life, 

khuqqah,  XXXIII  :15,  but  perhaps  with  refer- 
ence to  XX:11;  XVIII  :19,  21. 
3.  Commandments. 
No  instances. 

XXVI.  DANIEL 

1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  IX:  5,  appar- 
ently. 

2.  Statutes. 

No  instances. 

3.  Commandments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  IX  :5,  probably. 

B.  In  the  general  sense,  IX  :4. 

XXVII.  HAGGAI 

1.  Judgments. 

No  instances  of  the  use  of  this  word. 

2.  Statutes. 

No  instances. 

3.  Commandments. 
No  instances. 

XXVIII.    ZECHARIAH 

1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 


SIXTH   INVESTIGATION  207 

B.  Right  judging,  VII  :9;  VIII  :16. 

2.  Statutes. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  khoq,  1 :6,  prob- 
ably. 

3.  Commandments. 
No  instances. 

XXIX.    MALACHI 

1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  IV  :4   (Heb. 

111:22). 

B.  Right  judging,  11:17. 

C.  Judgment  upon  men,  111:5. 

2.  Statutes. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  IV  :4   (Heb. 
111:22). 

3.  Commandments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 

B.  General  sense,  11:1,  4. 

XXX.     I   AND   II   CHRONICLES 

1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning    and    use,    II    Chron. 

XXXIII  :8;  VII  :17;  I  Chron.  XXII  :13; 
XXVIII  :7;  XIX  :10. 

B.  Judging,  I  Chron.  VI:12;  II  Chron.  XIX  :6,  8. 

C.  Divine  laws,  I  Chron.  XVI  :12,  14. 

D.  Justice,  I  Chron.  XVIII  :14;  II  Chron.  IX  :8. 

E.  "Manner"  or  "order"  with  "k,"  I  Chron.  XXIII : 

31;  XV:13;  XXIV  :19;  II  Chron.  IV:20; 
XXXV  :13;  XXX  :16;  I  Chron.  VI:32  (Heb. 
17),  II  Chron.  VIII  :14. 

F.  "Cause"  (AV),  II  Chron.  VI:35,  39;  XIX  :10. 

G.  "Fashion"  (AV),  II  Chron.  IV :7. 


208  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

2.  Statutes. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  khoq,  I  Chron. 

XXII  :13 ;  II  Chron.  XXXVIII  :8 ;  XIX  :10 ;  VII : 
17;  I  Chron.  XXIX  :19;  XXXIV  :31,  khuqqah, 
II  Chron.  VII:  19. 

B.  "Ordinances"  (AV),  khoq,  II  Chron.  XXXV  :25. 

3.  Commandments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning    and    use,    II    Chron. 

XXXI  :21,  probably  in  accord  with  the  technical 
use  of  law  words,  I  Chron.  XXVIII  :7 ;  II  Chron. 
VII  :19;  I  Chron.  XXIX  :19;  II  Chron.  XXXIV: 
31. 

B.  General  sense,  II  Chron.  XXIX  :25   (2);  XIV  :4 

(Heb.  3)  ;  XIX  :10,  though  used  in  this  passage 
together  with  "statutes"  and  "judgments"  in 
the  technical  sense,  "commandments"  is  here 
evidently  used  as  the  word  "law"  immediately 
preceding,  II  Chron.  VIII  :14,  15;  XXX  :12; 
XXIV  :21;  XXIX  :25;  VIII  :13,  15;  XXIX  :15; 
XXXV  :10,  15,  16;  XXX  :6;  I  Chron.  XXVIII: 
7.  8;  II  Chron.  XXIV  :20;  XVII  :4. 

XXXI.   EZRA 

1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  VII  :10. 

B.  "Custom"  (AV),  with  "k,"  111:4. 

2.  Statutes. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,   khoq,  VII: 
10,  11. 

3.  Commandments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  VII  :11,  prob- 

ably, but  not  certainly  indicated. 

B.  General  sense,  X:3;  IX:10,  14. 


SIXTH   INVESTIGATION  209 

XXXII.    NEHEMIAH 

1.  Judgments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  IX:  13;  1:7, 

with  reference  to  "Moses";  IX:29;  X:29  (Heb. 
30). 

B.  "Manner"   (AV),  with  "k,"  VIII  :18. 

2.  Statutes. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  khoq,  IX:  13; 
1:7;  IX:14;  X:29  (Heb.  30). 

3.  Commandments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use,  X:29   (Heb. 

30)  ;  1 :7 ;  IX  :13  ;  IX  :14,  29  probably. 

B.  In  the  general  sense,  XI:23;  XIII  :5;  XII  :24,  45; 

X:32  (Heb.  33)  ;  1:9;  IX:16,  34;  1:5. 

XXXIII.  ESTHER 

1.  Judgments. 

No  instances  of  the  use  of  the  word. 

2.  Statutes. 

No  instances. 

3.  Commandments. 

A.  In  the  technical  meaning  and  use;  no  instances. 

B.  General  sense,  111:3. 

The  value  of  the  evidence  brought  to  light  in  the 
preceding  investigation  might  seem  to  depend  largely 
upon  the  correctness  of  the  order  in  which  the  books 
are  arranged.  In  fact  it  is  not  so,  as  will  appear  in 
the  summarizing  of  results  to  follow.  The  books  must 
be  placed  in  order  according  to  some  arrangment  in 
the  investigation.  They  have  been  placed,  for  the  most 
part,  in  the  order  approved  by  the  scholarship  of 
Christendom  down  to  the  time  of  the  modern  school  of 
Old  Testament  criticism  and  still  held  by  the  great 


210  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

body  of  the  Christian  church  and  of  Christian  scholars, 
except  those  who  have  accepted  the  views  of  the  modern 
historical  school.  The  order  in  which  the  writings  of 
the  contemporaneous  prophets  should  be  placed,  is,  of 
course,  a  question  beset  with  difficulties  and  uncertain- 
ties. But  as  these  difficulties  and  uncertainties  involve 
but  a  few  years  at  most,  they  do  not,  in  the  least,  affect 
the  results  of  this  investigation  which  is  designed  to 
show  the  usage  of  these  law  words  at  different  periods. 

The  Book  of  Psalms  is  manifestly,  on  its  very  face, 
and  by  consent  of  all  Biblical  students,  a  late  compila- 
tion as  a  hook,  probably  in  the  time  and  under  the 
direction  of  Ezra;  Individual  Psalms  composing  the 
book  have  each  its  own  date  from  the  days  of  David 
the  "Sweet  Psalmist  of  Israel"  down  to  the  Psalms  of 
Degrees  among  the  returning  Exiles  and  the  XC  Psalm 
is  usually  accredited  to  Moses.  I  have  placed  the  book, 
for  its  earlier  Psalms,  at  the  place  to  which  its  earliest 
would  entitle  it,  and,  for  the  latter  Psalms,  in  the 
period  from  which  those  Psalms  came. 

The  book  of  Job  is  admittedly  of  uncertain  date. 
Two  views  contend  for  preference ;  one  which  assigns 
Job  to  the  Patriarchal  Period  because  of  its  patriarchal 
dress  and  setting,  the  other  vv^hich  assigns  it  to  the 
period  of  the  Wisdom  literature  because  of  its  philoso- 
phical ideas  and  its  dramatic  form.  It  would  be  an 
unnecessary  digression  to  enter  here  fully  upon  a  dis- 
cussion of  the  date  of  this  book,  as  the  evidence  which 
the  book  actually  presents  on  the  use  of  these  technical 
Law  words  is  very  small,  indeed,  and  would  in  nowise 
change  the  result  in  whichever  place  it  may  be  as- 
signed. I  have  assigned  the  book  to  the  patriarchal 
age  mainly  because  of  its  patriarchal  tone  and  because 
apparent  reference  to  Scriptures  are  to  Ex.  XV,  Deut. 


SIXTH   INVESTIGATION  211 

XXXII  and  Psalm  XC,  which  is  most  probably  the 
work  of  Moses.  But,  as  already  intimated,  it  will  be 
unnecessary,  for  the  purpose  of  this  investigation,  to 
argue  more  definitely  the  question  of  the  chronological 
order  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  or  attempt  to 
reach  more  conclusively  a  decision  between  contending 
views  because  the  result  of  the  investigation  based 
upon  the  order  of  the  books  according  to  the  modern 
historical  criticism  will  also  be  given  as  well  as  the  re- 
sult based  upon  the  order  of  books  here  adopted.  The 
results  of  the  investigation,  book  by  book,  may  best 
first  be  exhibited  in  a  diagram  from  which  the  results 
may  be  collated  and  summarized  according  to  each  of 
the  proposed  arrangments  of  the  books. 

A  careful  study  of  the  results  of  the  investigation  as 
shown  for  the  various  books  in  the  Diagram  (p.212) 
brings  to  light  the  following  facts : 

The  book  of  Joshua  presents  a  few  instances  of  the 
use  of  these  technical  Law  terms,  "judgments"  2, 
"statutes"  2,  "commandments"  1.  The  book  of  Judges 
has  but  one  probable  instance  of  the  use  of  "command- 
ments" in  the  technical  sense.  Ruth  and  I  Samuel  fur- 
nish no  instances  of  the  use  of  these  technical  Law 
terms.  II  Samuel,  I  Kings,  the  Davidic  Psalms,  Pro- 
verbs, Ecclesiastes  and  the  Song  of  Solomon  show  far 
more  frequent  use  of  these  technical  Law  words  than 
even  Joshua.  There  are  instances  as  follows:  "Judg- 
ments" 7,  "statutes"  11,  "commandments"  13.  During 
the  time  from  the  division  of  the  Kingdom  down  to  the 
Exile  there  are  only  the  following  instances  of  the 
use  of  these  words  in  the  technical  sense :  II  Kings,  at 
the  outset  of  the  history,  "judgments"  3,  "statutes"  2, 
"commandments"  7.  After  this  the  use  of  these  words 
practically  ceases  during  this  whole  long  period  of  re- 


Conque 

d 

St 

to  Division 

c^    I    ;    ;    : 
c<i     :     ;     i    ; 

T-l          •           ■           '          ' 

Div 

ision 

of  Kingdc 

m 

to 

E> 

lilc 

Exile  to  End 

Q           i  t-  rH  tK      ! 

s 

w 

tH  05  ,H 

OQ 

(M  t~TH  CO      ! 

i 

•-5 

'-5 

,-i<x>tH"<*    i 

< 

g 

s 

is 

•J 

c 

Proverbs    .... 
Ecclesiastes 
Song  of  Sol. 

0 
§ 

Oh 

I  &  II  Chron 

Ezra    

Nehemiah    .. 
Esther    

U 

§ 

d 

w 

O 

M 

M 

O 

1 

►^ 

•-J 

s 
1 

Q 

T 

1 

§ 

GO 

611 

T— 1 

t> 

d 

CO 

n 

<N 

eg 

02 

g3 

•n  0) 

(M 

CO 

e- 

t-3 

^^  i 

h 

0) 

C 

C 

> 

X 

^ 

0 

ft 

3 

a 
c 

4  c 

>    0 

I? 

312 

u 

I' 

3-^ 

s 

[a 
IS 
a 

i 
i'l 

3  0 

3  5 

3.^ 
si 

SIXTH   INVESTIGATION  213 

ligious  decline.  Of  all  the  long  list  of  prophets,  Jonah, 
Joel,  Amos,  Hosea,  Isaiah,  Micah,  Nahum,  Zephaniah, 
Habakkuk,  Jeremiah  and  the  Lamentations,  and  Obe- 
diah,  only  the  following  furnishes  any  instances  of  the 
technical  use  of  these  Law  terms:  Isaiah  "judgments" 
1,  "Jeremiah  "statutes"  2.  In  the  great  period  of 
moral  and  religious  reform  during  the  Exile,  when 
Israel  was  forever  cured  of  Idolatry,  the  frequent  use 
of  these  technical  Law  words  comes  back;  the  pro- 
phets Ezekiel,  Daniel,  Haggiai,  Zechariah  and  Malachi 
furnish  the  following  instances:  "Judgments"  29, 
"statutes"  25.  Of  these,  Ezekiel,  the  great  prophet  of 
the  restoration  of  Israel's  religion,  uses  in  the  technical 
sense,  '^judgments"  27  times  and  "statutes"  23  times. 
In  the  period  of  the  Second  glory,  the  return  and  the 
re-establishment  of  the  kingdom  and  the  worship,  the 
later  Psalms,  I  and  II  Chronicles,  Ezra,  Nehimiah  and 
Esther  keep  up  the  use  of  these  technical  Law  words 
with  instances:  "Judgments"  12,  "statutes"  13,  "com- 
mandments" 12. 

Even  a  very  cursory  glance  at  these  facts  thus  sum- 
marized makes  very  plain  that  the  abundant  use  of 
these  technical  terms  at  the  period  from  which  the  "P 
Document"  is  claimed  to  have  come,  the  period  of  the 
Exile  and  afterward  together  with  the  use  of  these 
same  technical  terms  in  Joshua  which  is  ascribed 
largely  also  to  the  "P  Document"  seems  very  strongly 
to  support  the  Documentary  Theory.  It  seems  to  be 
the  possibility  anticipated  and  stated  at  the  outset  of 
this  investigation  (p.  191).  But,  alas,  for  any  hopes 
aroused  by  this  in  the  minds  of  the  advocates  of  that 
Theory,  the  frequent  employment  of  these  technical 
terms  in  the  period  of  the  great  emergence  of  Israel's 
religion  the  glory  of  the  kingdom  and  the  worship,  in 


214  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

the  days  of  David  and  Solomon  is  fatal  to  such  hopes. 
The  technical  use  of  these  words  at  that  epoch  of  Is- 
rael's history  shows  that  the  Law  which  contains  them 
was  known  at  that  time,  and  so  is  fatal  to  the  view 
that  this  Law  with  its  technical  terms  originated  in 
the  "P  Document"  at  the  time  of  the  Exile  or  later. 
For  though  one  of  the  contrasted  words  "judgments" 
and  "statutes"  is  said,  according  to  the  Documentary 
Theory  to  have  been  employed  in  J  and  E,  and  JE,  yet 
the  technical  character  of  the  words  is  dependent  on 
the  contrast  and  cannot  exist  without  it  (p.  279),  and 
besides,  according  to  the  Documentary  Theory,  even 
these  Documents,  J  and  E,  and  JE,  did  not  exist  until 
long  after  the  days  of  the  great  glory  in  the  days  of 
David  and  Solomon. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  history  of  the  use  of  these 
technical  Law  words  presented  by  this  summary  of 
their  use  throughout  the  time  from  the  Conquest  of  the 
Promised  land  onward  to  the  end  is  in  exact  accord 
with  the  history  of  Israel  at  its  face  value,  without  any 
reconstruction.  It  is  to  be  expected  that  some  use  of 
these  technical  terms  would  be  found  in  the  time  of 
Joshua  as  the  children  of  Israel  left  the  wilderness 
period  and  entered  into  possession,  the  time  of  Joshua 
and  those  elders  that  overlived  Joshua,"  when  Israd 
still  faithfully  served  the  Lord  as  taught  in  the  wilder- 
ness. Such  use  of  these  words  is  found.  Then  it  is  in 
exact  accord  with  the  conditions  of  the  times  during 
the  long  period  of  development  in  the  period  of  the 
Judges  during  which  the  truth  taught  in  the  wilderness 
was  leavening  the  new  national  life,  until  the  great 
emergence  of  the  kingdom  and  the  worship  in  the 
days  of  David  and  Solomon,  that  there  should  be  little 
or  no  use  of  these    technical    terms.      Religion    and 


SIXTH   INVESTIGATION  215 

morals  were,  for  a  long  time  after  the  scattering  of 
the  people  to  their  possessions  in  severalty,  at  a  very- 
low  ebb,  and  the  technical  distinctions  of  the  Law 
were  forgotten  and  do  not  appear  in  the  literature  of 
the  time.  With  the  outshining  of  true  religion  in  the 
days  of  David  and  Solomon  and  the  establishment  of  a 
strong  government  for  the  enforcement  of  the  civil  and 
criminal  laws,  it  is  most  natural  that  the  technical 
Law  words  should  be  revived,  and  they  were. 

With  the  great  period  of  corruption  of  the  people 
after  the  division  of  the  kingdom  it  is  again  most 
natural  that,  with  the  falling  away  of  the  people  from 
true  piety  and  a  high  morality,  and  the  growth  of  the 
worship  of  other  gods  and  the  practice  of  heathen 
orgies,  the  technical  distinction  of  the  Law  words 
should  be  overlooked.  Again,  it  was  exactly  so.  But, 
when  the  days  of  the  reformation  came,  and  the  great 
prophets  of  the  reformation  in  the  days  of  the  Exile, 
and  the  great  statesmen  leaders  of  the  return  and  the 
re-establishment,  it  is  to  be  expected  that,  with  the 
re-establishment  of  the  reign  of  law  and  of  the  Cere- 
monial worship,  the  technical  Law  words  should  be 
revived;  and  so  they  were,  and  were  used  more  than 
at  any  other  place  in  the  Bible,  except  in  the  record 
of  the  Law  itself. 

Thus  this  investigation  of  the  books  of  this  whole 
period  from  the  Conquest  to  the  end  of  Old  Testament 
history  attests  them  at  their  face  value  and  at  the 
same  time  confirms  the  technical  meaning  and  use 
that  would  be  forgotten  or  neglected  in  the  times  of 
decline  and  revived  at  the  times  of  revival,  as  shown 
by  the  use  of  these  words  throughout  this  whole  na- 
tional period.  Such  use  of  these  words  cannot  be  an 
accident  of  later  Documents;  it  must  be  natural,  i.e. 
historical. 


Chapter  VII 
SEVENTH  INVESTIGATION 

Archaeological  Evidence  Concerning  Penta- 
TEUCHAL  Times 

Full  consideration  of  archaeological  evidence  con- 
cerning Pentateuchal  times  would  make  a  book,  in- 
deed, has  made  more  than  one  book.  Among  others 
who  have  written  upon  this  subject,  the  author  has 
also  given  very  extended  presentation  of  this  class 
of  evidence  concerning  Pentateuchal  times  {Moses  and 
the  Monuments,  Light  from  Archaeology  on  Penta- 
teuchal Times,  Lectures  on  the  Stone  Foundation, 
Princeton  Theological  Seminary,  1919,  Bibliotheca 
Sacra  Company).  No  more  than  a  brief  compendium 
of  the  facts  and  conclusions  can  be  condensed  into  a 
single  chapter  of  this  book.  For  complete  presenta- 
tion and  examination  of  the  evidence,  the  reader  is  re* 
ferred  to  the  work  cited  above. 

I.  There  are  peculiar  words,  phrases  and  narratives, 
some  in  the  Hebrew  of  the  Pentateuch,  some  in  the 
Egyptian  of  the  inscriptions,  which  betray  such  rela- 
tion between  the  Hebrew  of  the  Pentateuch  and  the 
Egyptian  of  the  inscriptions  of  the  age  of  the  Exodus, 
and  such  mutual  influence  of  one  language  upon  the 
other,  as  to  certify  both  the  books  of  the  Pentateuch 
and  these  Egyptian  inscriptions  of  Exodus  times  to 

216 


SEVENTH  INVESTIGATION  217 

the  same  period  under  the  influence  of  the  same  cus- 
toms and  events. 

The  ancient  Egyptians  were  a  most  exclusive  people ; 
the  Hermit  Kingdom  of  more  modern  times  hardly  ex- 
celled them  in  this  respect.  Naturally,  things  foreign, 
as  well  as  foreigners  themselves,  were  repugnant  to  the 
national  taste  and  temperment.  Only  the  most  general 
and  potent  influence  of  a  foreign  language  could, 
under  such  conditions,  find  such  sympathetic  response 
from  the  Egyptians  as  that  so  exclusive  a  people  should 
incorporate  foreign  words  into  their  language.  The 
entrance  of  Israel  into  Egypt  as  favorites  of  the 
throne  and  their  repression  and  retention  as  slaves  of 
the  crown,  when  they  had  grown  very  numerous,  thus 
instituting  constant  intercourse  between  them  and  the 
Egyptians,  would  supply  exactly  such  wide-spread  and 
long-continued  influence  of  the  Hebrew  tongue  upon 
the  Egyptian  as  would  be  necessary  to  result  in  the  in- 
corporation of  Hebrew  words  into  the  Egyptian 
tongue;  nothing  less  would  accomplish  such  a  result. 
In  very  fact,  the  period  of  Israel's  historical  sojourn  in 
Egypt  as  slaves  saw,  among  Egyptians,  exactly  such 
adoption  of  Semitic  words  into  the  Egyptian  tongue. 
There  was  in  the  XVIII  and  early  XIX  Dynasties  a 
very  prevalent  fad  in  the  use  of  such  foreign  words, 
almost  wholly  Semitic.  In  the  latter  part  of  this  period, 
at  the  very  time  of  the  Exodus  period,  indeed,  such  dis- 
tinct Hebrew  words  of  the  Pentateuch  as  Succoth,  Ohel, 
Migdol,  and  Ado7i  were  adopted  by  the  Egyptians. 
Succoth,  shepherds  tents,  i.e.  temporary  "booths,"  be- 
came, in  the  Egyptian  as  in  the  Hebrew  of  the  Penta- 
teuch, the  name  of  the  district  in  Egypt  from  which 
Israel  departed  at  the  time  of  the  Exodus,  Ohel,  the 
Hebrew  word  for  the  Tabernacle,  was  used  by  the 


218  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTAl-EUCH 

Egyptians  to  denote  a  permanent  tent  of  cloth  or 
skins  used  by  foreigners  from  the  east.  Migdol,  a 
watch-tower  in  Hebrew,  is  common  enough  in  the 
Egyptian  records  of  military  affairs  of  that  period. 
Adon,  Hebrew  for  a  master  of  slaves,  is  the  very  name 
given  by  the  Egyptians  to  the  Superintendent  of  the 
foreign  slaves  employed  on  public  works  exactly  as  the 
African  slave  in  America  gave  the  name  "massa"  to  his 
owner. 

Such  facts  give  unimpeachable  evidence  of  just  such 
Egyptian  influence  upon  Pentateuchal  times  as  is 
claimed  by  the  Pentateuchal  narrative  (Moses  and  the 
Monuments,  pp.  1-18). 

Still  more  startling  evidences  of  Egyptian  influence 
on  the  people  of  Israel  at  the  time  of  the  composition 
of  the  Pentateuch  is  found  in  Egyptian  words  in  the 
Hebrew  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  in  the  plain  Egyptian 
stamp  upon  Pentateuchal  narrative  of  Egyptian  events 
and  episodes.  When  one  has  become  familiar  with  the 
physical  phenomena  of  Egypt  as  they  occur  over  a  long 
period  of  years,  though  never  all  in  one  year,  and  oft- 
times  not  in  one  life-time,  the  physical  embodiment  of 
the  Plagues  of  Egypt  is  seen  to  be  so  distinctly  and 
thoroughly  Egyptian  and  the  Pentateuchal  account  of 
these  tragic  episodes  of  Egyptian  history  so  phenomen- 
ally Egyptian  in  character  as  could  be  written  only  by 
one  conversant,  through  long  residence,  with  Egyptian 
phenomena  and  would  be  written  only  for  those  who 
themselves  were  equally  familiar  with  Egyptian  con- 
ditions and  events  (Moses  and  the  Monuments,  pp.  18- 
23). 

Then,  very  peculiar  and  significant  Egyptian  words 
are  translated,  or  transliterated,  into  the  Hebrew  of 
the  Pentateuch,  words  which,  in  their  use,  as  employed 


SEVENTH  INVESTIGATION  219 

in  the  Pentateuch,  belonged  in  Egypt  only  to  the  period 
of  Israel's  sojourn  and  of  the  Exodus.  Walls,  Egyp- 
tian "anhu,"  are  mentioned  as  along  the  eastern  fron- 
tier of  Egypt  for  which,  indeed,  the  desert  in  that  part 
of  it  was  named,  in  Hebrew  Shur,  i.e.  "walls."  These 
"walls"  were  unknown  in  the  later  period  of  Egypt's 
history,  when  it  is  claimed  by  some  that  the  Pentateuch 
was  written,  belong,  in  fact,  only  to  the  period  claimed 
for  them  in  the  Pentateuch.  It  is  hardly  believable  that 
they  could  have  been  thus  correctly  referred  to  by  late 
writers.  "Abomination,"  also,  as  applied  to  shepherds 
in  the  Pentateuch  had  no  place  in  Egyptian  life  in  the 
later  times  to  which  the  Pentateuch  is  by  some  attri- 
buted. At  the  time  of  the  Exodus,  however,  "anhu," 
walls,  are  of  frequent  mention  in  the  Egyptian  inscrip- 
tions, as  on  this  eastern  frontier,  and  "aat,"  "abomina- 
tion," together  with  other  equally  appropriate  epithets, 
were  so  persistently  used  to  denote  the  Hyksos  kings, 
the  patrons  of  the  Israelites  at  their  entrance  into 
Egypt,  that,  to  this  day,  it  has  never  been  found  pos- 
sible to  learn  the  ethnic  name  of  these  foreign  oppres- 
sors of  Egypt.  This  word  "aat"  passes  out  of  use  in 
this  application  of  it  in  later  times.  The  period  of  the 
Exodus  is  thus  the  only  time  when  writers  would 
naturally  use  these  two  words,  "walls"  and  "abomina- 
tion," and  the  only  time  when  we  may  rightly  expect 
them  to  be  known  (Moses  and  the  Monuments,  pp. 
23-28). 

Another  characteristic  of  the  Pentateuchal  records 
still  more  manifestly  impossible  at  a  later  period  is  the 
presence  in  the  Hebrew  of  very  peculiarly  significant 
Egyptian  words  most  accurately  used,  so  accurately, 
indeed,  as  to  preclude  the  idea  that  mere  art  or  acquisi- 
tion at  a  later  time  could  have  attained  to  such  pro- 


220  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

ficiency.  The  Egyptian  names  Zaphnath-paaneah, 
Asenath,  Potapher  and  Potaphera  have  their  best  and 
most  natural  Egyptian  equivalents  in  the  Hyksos 
period  to  which  the  Bible  attributes  them  {Moses  and 
the  Monuments,  pp.  28-40) .  Who  would  have  interest 
in  remembering  or  retaining  such  names  after  the 
Israelites  left  Egypt  and  Egyptian  influences? 

Besides  these  proper  names  there  are  Egyptian  com- 
mon nouns  denoting  peculiar  Egyptian  conditions  and 
not  similarly  applicable  anywhere  else.  Akhu,  Egyp- 
tian for  swamp-pasture  lands,  shesh,  Egyptian  for 
linen,  the  "fine  white  linen"  of  Leviticus,  Yeor,  the 
Egyptian  word  for  "stream,"  applied  especially  to  the 
Nile  and  its  canals  are  examples  of  this  class  of  words. 
The  very  peculiar,  and  in  some  cases,  greatly  extended, 
use  of  these  Egyptian  words,  even  throughout  all  of 
the  various  principal  "Documents"  and  by  the  different 
principal  authors  according  to  the  "Documentary 
Theory,"  is  only  explicable  on  the  theory  of  a  single 
author  about  the  time  of  the  Exodus  and  that  author  a 
person  most  familiar  with  Egyptian  life  and  language 
{Moses  and  the  Monuments,  pp.  41-52). 

Thus  all  these  peculiarities  of  word  and  phrase  and 
narrative  are  exactly  in  accord  with  the  Egyptian  in- 
fluence and  affiliations  as  claimed  by  the  Pentateuchal 
narrative  and  to  which  the  narrative  is  attributed,  and 
not  only  so,  but  are  most  antagonistic  to  the  idea  of 
several  authors  at  different  later  dates. 

II.  The  Pentateuchal  question  is  often  represented 
as  pre-eminently  a  literary  question.  Without,  at  this 
time,  discussing  this  question,  let  us  view  it  as  such 
that  we  may  see  the  result. 

There  are  such  general  literary  characteristics  dis- 
played in  the  writings  of  the  Pentateuch  as  that,  when 


SEVENTH   INVESTIGATION  221 

compared  with  Egyptian  literature  on  the  one  hand 
and  with  Babylonian  and  late  Hebrew  literature  of  the 
time  of  the  Exile  and  after  on  the  other  hand,  show  the 
Hebrew  language  to  have  become  fixed  in  its  literary 
forms  by  sacred  books  in  contact  with  Egyptian  influ- 
ence, rather  than  Babylonian  influence,  and  the  Penta- 
teuch to  have  proceeded  from  Exodus  times  and  not 
from  Exilic  or  post-exilic  times.  Not  only  is  this  so, 
but  there  are  literary  allusions  in  the  books  of  the  Law 
to  Egyptian  ideas  and  customs  and  idioms,  the  archae- 
ological conditions  needed  to  make  literary  room  and 
preparation  for  the  Pentateuch  in  Mosaic  times  are 
found  naturally  and  fully  before  the  Exodus,  the 
archaeology  of  the  books  of  the  Law  themselves  is  in 
exact  accord  with  the  literary  representations  of  the 
Pentateuch,  and,  indeed,  it  is  finally  out  of  all  these 
sources  that  the  distinguishing  literary  characteristic 
of  the  Pentateuch  comes. 

It  would  be  impossible  here  fully  to  note  all  the  allu- 
sions to  Egyptian  customs  and  idioms  found  in  the 
Pentateuch.  Oriental  literature  is,  above  everything 
else,  picturesque,  so  that  allusions  abound  in  the  Penta- 
teuchal  literature.  The  unique  dual  form  of  the 
Hebrew  name  for  Egypt,  mitsraim,  is  but  recently 
found  to  contain  allusion  to  an  infrequent  Egyptian 
pictograph  of  an  enclosure  to  denote  northern  Egypt, 
Thus  mitsraim,  in  the  dual,  the  "double  enclosure,"  is 
a  Hebrew  name  for  an  Egyptian  idea  of  the  land 
{Moses  and  the  Monuments,  pp.  53-62).  Again,  mat- 
teh,  "staff,"  as  in  the  LXX  account  of  the  blessings  of 
Jacob,  instead  of  mittah,  "bed,"  as  pointed  in  the  Mas- 
soretic  text  of  the  Hebrew  and  translated  in  the  A.  V. 
and  in  the  R.  V.,  also,  is  now  most  certainly  known  to 
be  a  reference,  in  abbreviated  form,  to  the  Egyptian 


222  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

formula  for  the  taking  of  an  oath,  a  reference  that 
would  be  quite  admissible  at  the  time  of  the  Exodus 
and  among  a  people  just  come  out  of  Egypt,  but  quite 
inexplicable  at  a  late  date  in  the  history  of  Israel.  It  is 
improbable  that  a  late  writer  would  have  known  to 
make  such  a  reference  and  certain  that  the  people 
would  not  then  have  understood  it,  when  they  read  it. 

Then,  the  mysterious  expression,  "I  am,"  and  the  use 
of  the  divine  covenant  name  Jehovah  as  equivalent  to 
it,  intended  to  be  understood  in  Egypt  and  by  Egyp- 
tians is  only  explicable  by  a  knowledge  of  Egyptian 
which  neither  a  late  writer  nor  late  readers  could  be 
expected  to  possess  (Moses  and  the  Monuments,  pp. 
62-69).  If  demand  be  made  for  evidence  of  literary 
preparation  for  the  Pentateuch  in  Exodus  times  the 
demand  is  immediately  met  by  the  certainty  of  the 
origin  of  the  alphabet  before  Mosaic  times  (Zerbe,  The 
Antiquity  of  Hebrew  Writing,  pp.  139ff ) ,  and  the  equal 
certainty  of  the  use  of  the  Babylonian  cuneiform  for 
important  documents  in  Palestine,  or  for  Palestine,  at 
the  time  of  the  writing  of  the  Tel  el-Amarna  tablets 
before  the  Exodus,  and  the  overwhelming  evidence  of 
the  preparation  and  use  of  Law  codes  in  both  Egypt 
and  Babylonia  long  before  the  days  of  Moses  (Lyon, 
Code  of  Khammurabi,  Journal  of  American  Oriental 
Society,  1914,  pp.  248-265,  also,Moses  and  the  Mon- 
uments, pp.  69-79). 

The  archaeology  of  the  books  of  the  Bible  themselves 
is  often  overlooked  or  obscured  and  the  right  to  use 
it  in  Biblical  discussions  tacitly  denied.  All  questions 
of  inspiration  and  divine  authority  aside,  the  Scriptures 
are  literary  remains  of  antiquity  of  equal  rank  and 
authority,  according  to  their  character,  with  all  other 
archaeological  material.     Such  being  the  case,   it  is 


SEVENTH   INVESTIGATION  223 

exceedingly  significant  that  the  description  of  the  route 
of  the  Exodus  is  still  the  best  guide-book  for  the  route 
from  Suez  to  Mount  Sinai,  Then,  the  biography  of 
Moses,  symmetrical  and  progressive,  throughout  all 
the  so-called  "Documents,"  and  the  orderly,  progressive 
development  of  the  Law-codes  from  the  brief  code  of  a 
few  laws  in  the  Commandments,  and  certain  judg- 
ments and  simple  ritual  laws  of  Exodus  XX-XXIII:19, 
on  throughout  the  elaborate  code  in  Leviticus  and  the 
progress  of  revelation  and  doctrine  in  the  additions  and 
changes  made  throughout  the  wilderness  period  as  re- 
corded in  Numbers,  to  the  addresses  of  the  great  states- 
man to  the  people  about  to  enter  upon  a  new  phase  of 
national  life  recorded  in  Deuteronomy ;  the  oral  teach- 
ings of  Moses  who  spake  from  time  to  time  "unto  the 
people,"  and  the  journalistic  manner  of  recording  these 
teachings  at  their  appropriate  place  in  the  record  of 
passing  events ;  all  these  prepare  the  way  and  provide 
the  Egyptian  influence  and  all  the  attending  peculiar 
circumstances  necessary  to  account  for  what  is  mani- 
festly the  result,  the  general  literary  characteristic,  of 
the  Pentateuchal  writings  now  to  be  examined. 

The  broad  distinguishing  literary  characteristic  of 
the  Pentateuchal  books  is  that  the  order  of  main  ideas 
in  the  sentence  in  the  Hebrew  of  the  Pentateuch,  the 
verb  being  set  forth  early  in  the  sentence  and  its  object 
following  after,  is  assimilated  to  the  order  of  the  same 
ideas  in  the  Egyptian  sentence  and  quite  the  reverse  of 
the  order  in  the  Babylonian,  where  the  verb  goes  to  the 
end  of  the  sentence.  Later  Hebrew  shows  many  Baby- 
lonisms  and  Aramaisms.  Ezekiel,  the  only  great 
late  work  known  to  have  been  written  in  Babylonia 
under  immediate  Babylonian  influence,  shows,  also,  a 
marked  tendency  to  assimilation  to  the  Babylonian  or- 


224  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

der  of  main  ideas  in  the  sentence.  If  the  so-called  "P 
Document,"  embracing  as  it  does  much  of  Genesis  and 
Exodus,  nearly  all  of  Leviticus  and  a  large  part  of  Num- 
bers, together  with  portions  of  Joshua,  had  been  writ- 
ten, like  Ezekiel,  in  Babylon  or  immediately  thereafter 
among  the  returning  exiles,  as  is  claimed,  it  could  not 
possibly  have  escaped  the  same  Babylonian  influences 
noted  in  Ezekiel.  In  fact,  the  examination  of  every 
verse  of  the  "P  Document"  shows  not  a  trace  of  such 
characteristics,  nor  even  the  common  Babylonisms 
and  Aramaisms  found  in  every  other  book  of  the  Bible 
having  Babylonian  contacts. 

There  is  no  assimilation  to  the  Babylonian  in  the  "P 
Document."  Therefore  probably  no  mingling  of  the 
Hebrew  of  the  "P  Document"  with  the  Babylonian  and 
so  no  origin  of  the  "P  Document"  under  Babylonian 
influences.  On  the  other  hand,  there  is  assimilation  of 
the  language  in  the  *T  Document"  to  the  Egyptian 
tongue,  a  result  which  comes  only  from  the  mingling  of 
tongues.  There  is,  also,  not  only  tradition,  but  his- 
torical claim,  for  an  historical  mingling  of  the  Hebrew 
tongue  with  the  Egyptian.  Therefore  the  production 
of  the  Pentateuch,  including  the  "P  Document,"  under 
Egyptian  influences,  in  accordance  with  Pentateuchal 
claims,  is  not  only  entirely  credible,  but  is  the  literary 
origin  of  the  Pentateuch  naturally  to  be  expected 
(Moses  and  the  Monuments,  pp.  80-114). 

III.  Historical  events  and  allusions  having  a  bearing 
upon  Pentateuchal  discussions,  point  without  excep- 
tion, largely  through  the  archaeology  of  the  Bible  itself, 
to  the  wilderness  period  of  Israel's  history  for  the 
origin  of  the  Moses  literary  traditions  and  so  for  the 
origin  of  the  literature  attributed  to  Moses  by  that 
tradition. 


SEVENTH   INVESTIGATION  225 

A  multitude  of  allusions  to  Egyptian  history  and  to 
Egyptian  customs  demand  such  Egyptian  influence  in 
Pentateuchal  times  as  only  the  representations  and 
claims  of  the  Pentateuch  for  such  influence  will  meet. 
A  late  origin  of  the  Pentateuchal  literature  makes 
these  allusions  senseless  for  the  people  of  such  late 
times.  How  would  they  understand  the  ceremonial 
significance  of  Joseph's  coat  of  many  colors  as  it  ap- 
pears in  Egyptian  represeatations  of  Palestinian  cus- 
toms? a  significance  which  had  long  since  passed  out 
of  use  in  Israel  even  in  the  time  of  David.  What  late 
writer  would  think  of  saying  of  an  Egyptian  officer  of 
Hyksos  times,  or,  indeed,  of  any  other  period  of  Egyp- 
tian history,  that  he  was  "an  Egyptian"?  Why  not, 
of  course,  "an  Egyptian"?  How  could  late  readers 
attach  any  sense  to  the  fear  of  the  Egyptians  that  the 
Israelite  slaves  would  get  them  "up  from  the  land," 
i.e.  "from  the  land  of  Goshen"  over  all  Egypt?  "Up," 
in  the  land  of  Egypt,  is  always  south.  It  was  not  flee- 
ing but  fighting,  that  the  Egyptians  feared  of  the 
Israelites.  Would  exiles  in  Babylon  understand  all  this 
and,  also,  the  location  of  the  Israelites  in  Egypt  in  the 
days  of  the  Hyksos  kings  1200  years  before?  How 
should  late  readers  know  without  explanation  that 
Edom  and  Moab  were  not  anachronisms  in  the  days 
of  Moses,  when,  with  all  the  archaeological  information 
of  the  present  day,  this  has  not  been  known  until  within 
a  few  years  ? 

All  these  things  confront  us,  to  say  nothing  of  the 
intimate  knowledge  of  Egypt  assumed  in  the  strange 
history  of  the  use  of  the  Egyptian  royal  title  Pharaoh, 
so  accurately  used  in  the  Bible  to  correspond  to  the 
changing  use  of  the  title  in  Egypt.  Equally  amazing 
is  the  reference  to  the  frontier  canal  on  the  east  of 


226  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

Egypt,  Shi-(t)-Hor,  i.e.  the  Horus  canal,  so  accurately 
alluded  to  in  mention  of  "Shihor" ;  as,  also  the  puzzling 
expression  "As  thou  comest  unto  Zoar,"  a  reference  to 
the  now  known  frontier  fortress,  "Tsoar,"  in  ancient 
Egypt ;  and  last  of  all  and  most  remarkable  of  all,  the 
use  of  the  local  name  of  a  small  part  of  the  Delta  of 
Egypt  in  the  time  of  the  XIX  Dynasty  as  the  "land  of 
Rameses,"  though  at  the  late  date  assumed  for  the 
Pentateuch,  it  had  long  been  forgotten  in  Egypt.  (For 
all  these  allusions  Moses  and  the  Monuments,  pp.  115- 
138). 

The  explanation  of  all  these  allusions,  which  archae- 
ological search  has  made  perfectly  clear  in  these  days, 
we  cannot  believe  was  possible  in  the  days  of  post- 
exilic  scribes,  or  even  of  VIII  or  VII  century  writers 
in  Palestine  as  required  by  the  Documentary  Theory. 

There  are,  also,  extended  narratives  which  are  per- 
fectly incomprehensible  as  the  work  of  an  exilic  or 
post-exilic  author.  Mr.  Wilbur  H.  Schoff  has  shown 
in  the  so-called  Trade  list  of  Tyre  that  Ezekiel's 
description  of  the  trade  of  Tyre  is  not  a  description 
of  the  whole  trade  of  Tyre,  but  only  of  the  things  that 
were  used  in  the  construction  of  the  Tabernacle,  the 
things  which  belonged  to  the  Priest's  portion,  and  the 
additional  materials  used  in  the  construction  of  the 
Temple  of  Solomon.  Thus  the  description  becomes  an 
allegory  of  the  doom  pronounced  upon  Babylon  for  the 
destruction  of  the  Temple  with  its  sacred  things  of  the 
Tabernacle  and  the  causing  the  priests'  portion  to  cease 
through  captivity.  But  such  allegorizing  for  the  exiles 
implies  not  only  that  Israel  was  perfectly  familiar  with 
the  Tabernacle  account  and  the  specifications  of  the 
priestly  portions,  but  that  the  people,  also,  were  famil- 
iar with  them  and  would  understand  what  Ezekiel 


SEVENTH   INVESTIGATION  227 

wrote,  otherwise  the  allegory  would  have  been  as  un- 
intelligible to  the  exiles  as  it  was  intended  to  be  to  the 
Babylonians.  Evidently  the  "P  Document,"  the  por- 
tion of  the  Pentateuch  which  contains  the  account  of 
these  things  in  the  wilderness,  was  not  written  a 
century  after  Ezekiel  wrote,  as  claimed  for  the  date 
of  the  'T  Document"  (Moses  and  the  Monumerits,  pp. 
138-140). 

The  account  of  the  finding  of  the  book  of  the  Law  in 
the  days  of  Josiah  contains  some  exceedingly  signifi- 
cant notes  which  give  archaeological  indications  con- 
cerning that  which  was  found.  Had  Hilkiah  no  curios- 
ity that  he  called  in  Shaphan  the  scribe  to  read  that 
document?  Could  only  a  scribe  who  was  expert  in 
dialects  and  documents  read  this  document  which  was 
found  ?  That  might  very  well  be,  if  it  was  a  real  docu- 
ment of  the  olden  time,  the  very  "book  of  the  Law  by 
the  hand  of  Moses"  as  the  account  asserts.  But  why 
so,  if  it  were  a  document  fabricated  at  the  time,  or  a 
fabrication  kept  over  from  the  days  of  Hezekiah,  and 
so  written  in  the  script  of  the  time?  Why  should 
Hilkiah  feel  any  need  for  a  Shaphan  the  scribe? 

And  again,  had  the  king  himself,  though  piously  in- 
clined and  so  ready  to  return  to  the  former  godly  ways, 
no  curiosity  that  he  did  not  take  the  document  into 
his  own  hands  and  read  it  as  did  Jehoiada  on  another 
occasion,  when  he  cut  the  roll  with  a  pen  knife  and 
burned  it? 

Then,  this  readiness  of  the  king  to  return  to  the  for- 
mer ways,  evinced  in  the  immediate  move  for  reforms 
leads  us  at  once  to  the  assumption  of  the  Moses  tradi- 
tion. Here  stands  out  the  virility  of  the  idea  that  the 
former  ways  ought  to  prevail.  How  far  back  does 
this  Moses  tradition  reach?    When  might  it  begin  and 


228  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

acquire  such  commanding  power  at  any  time  subse- 
quent to  the  time  of  Moses  himself?  Does  such  a 
dominant  tradition  spring  into  being  full  grown  out  of 
thin  air?  "The  Moses  required  for  the  acceptance  of 
the  book  'found'  according  to  the  Documentary  Theory 
is  not  the  Moses  of  the  Documentary  Theory,  but  the 
Moses  of  the  Pentateuch.  Those  who  hold  to  the  view 
of  the  critical  Moses  have  to  bring  up  the  'traditional 
Moses'  to  conjure  with.  They  are  in  much  the  same 
predicament  as  the  witch  of  Endor,  who  called  for 
the  Samuel  of  magic  and  got  the  real  Samuel.  Once  the 
Moses  tradition  is  admitted  at  all  (and  it  is  absolutely 
necessary  to  the  promulgation  of  laws  in  his  name  in 
the  days  of  Josiah),  there  is  no  place  to  stop  in  the 
search  for  its  origin  until  we  come  to  the  days  of 
Moses"  (Moses  and  the  Monuments,  pp.  140,145). 

All  these  hands  pointing  to  the  Mosaic  times  as  Pen- 
tateuchal  times  prepare  us  for  the  synchronisms  that 
archaeology  finds  in  Egypt  to  lay  along  side  of  the 
Pentateuchal  account.  Moses,  according  to  Exodus, 
was  called  at  the  death  of  those  who  sought  his  life,  i.e. 
the  king  of  Egypt  especially.  One  year  may  be  allowed 
for  the  arrangement  of  his  affairs  and  his  return  to 
Egypt.  Certainly  no  one  familiar  with  the  leisurely 
ways  of  the  East  will  think  a  year  too  long  a  time,  as 
things  are  done  there.  The  record  of  the  plagues  shows 
conclusively  that  the  natural  events  which  embodied 
them  occupied  a  year.  Two  years  elapsed  from  the 
Exodus  till  the  turning  back  at  Kadesh  Barneah.  Thus 
the  turning  back  was  at  the  beginning  of  the  fifth  year 
of  Moses  as  leader  of  Israel. 

Along  side  of  these  Biblical  facts  lay  these  others 
from  the  Egyptian  monuments.  The  tablet  of 
Meremptah  boasts  in  poetic  adulation,  among  many 


SEVENTH   INVESTIGATION  229 

other  things,  that  "Israel  is  destroyed,  her  seed  (chil- 
dren, not  crops)  is  not  {Deir  el-Bahari,  I,  PI.  XIX) 
Khar  (Palestine  by  the  way  of  the  Dead  Sea)  is  become 
as  widows  of  Egypt  (i.e.  mourning  for  her  lost  hus- 
band, Israel  who  failed  to  come  in)."  Now  this  tablet 
is  dated  in  the  fifth  year  of  Meremptah.  He  was  the 
immediate  successor  of  Rameses  from  whom  Moses  fled 
and  at  whose  death  he  was  called  to  return.  Thus  the 
fifth  year  of  Meremptah  would  be  the  fifth  year  of 
Moses, 

There  is  much  said  about  the  historical  method. 
Too  much  can  hardly  be  said.  Ours  is  an  historical 
religion,  with  historical  records.  This  exact  timing  of 
events,  these  exact  synchronisms,  not  only  give  con- 
fidence concerning  the  historicity  of  these  particular 
things,  but  throw  the  mantle  of  credence  over  all  the 
intervening  history  and  project  confidence  forward  to 
that  which  follows  in  the  wilderness  (Moses  and  the 
Monuments,  pp.  149-161). 

IV.  The  Tabernacle  and  its  furniture  and  the  vest- 
ments of  the  priests,  not  only  in  the  purposes  for  which 
they  were  intended  which  are  universal  and  so  tell  us 
little  or  nothing  about  the  place  of  the  origin  of  these 
things,  but  in  the  externals  which  may  be  localized  and 
hence  betray  provenance,  are  unmistakably  Egyptian 
with  not  a  trace  of  anything  distinctively  Babylonian 
in  them,  and  so  attest  the  Tabernacle  literature  to  the 
time  which  the  narrative  claims  for  itself. 

The  threefold  pattern  of  Egyptian  architecture,  the 
court,  the  semi-private  apartment  and  the  inner  private 
apartment,  is  universal  down  even  to  the  present-day 
peasant,  to  the  vv^andering  Bedouin  in  the  land,  and  to 
the  modern  explorer  himself.  In  ancient  times  it  was 
the  pattern  of  the  peasant's  house,  the  pattern  of  the 


230  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

palace,  the  pattern  of  the  tomb,  the  house  of  the  dead, 
and  the  pattern  of  the  temple,  the  house  of  the  gods. 
In  palace  and  tomb  and  temple,  the  idea  was  often 
much  elaborated,  but,  always  ,the  fundamental  idea, 
the  threefold  pattern  remained.  This  threefold  pat- 
tern was  also  carried  out  in  the  temple  by  a  gradual 
narrowing  and  a  very  slight  gradual  elevation  as  one 
progressed  toward  the  most  holy  place. 

Among  the  many  similarities  between  the  furniture 
of  the  Tabernacle  and  the  vestments  of  the  priests  and 
like  things  in  Egypt,  are  the  pectoral  or  breast-plate 
the  fine  twined  white  linen,  the  ark  with  its  archives, 
and,  above  all,  the  overshadowing  of  wings  as  a  symbol 
of  sheltering  divine  providence,  the  most  universally 
prevalent  symbol  in  Egypt,  are  most  notable  (Moses 
and  the  Monuments,  pp.  162-183) . 

The  divineness  of  the  pattern  remains  unaffected  by 
this  naturalistic  provenance.  The  things  of  nature  are 
God's  always  and  everywhere.  Their  use  by  the  heathen 
does  not  make  them  theirs  nor  debar  God  from  his  own. 
But  the  distinctly  Egyptian  character  of  these  things 
does  most  seriously  affect  the  claim  for  a  late  origin  of 
the  Tabernacle  narrative  under  Babylonian  influences. 
If  these  Exilic,  or  post-exilic,  priest-scribes  made  "all 
things  according  to  their  own  imagination,"  how  comes 
it  that  they  had  an  Egyptian  imagination  ?  Or,  if  they 
purposely  so  planned  their  work,  how  were  they  so  un- 
diplomatic as  to  brave  the  wrath  of  their  Babylonian, 
or  Persian,  suzerein  by  drawing  the  imagery  of  a  new 
religious  book  of  ceremonial  from  the  hated  enemies  of 
the  Empire?  The  only  explanation  compatible  with 
common  sense  is  that  the  statement  of  Scripture  is 
true,  that  God  said,  "See  thou  make  all  things  accord- 
ing to  the  pattern  showed  thee  in  the  mount"  and  that 


SEVENTH   INVESTIGATION  231 

they  did  it  (Moses  and  the  Monuments,  pp.  183-192). 

V.  The  obscurity  of  the  doctrine  of  eschatology  in 
the  Pentateuch  finds  its  only  reasonable  explanation, 
and,  indeed,  is  fully  illuminated  by  examination  of  the 
Egyptian  eschatology  of  the  Exodus  period.  Although 
the  whole  Pentateuchal  narrative  moves  ever  in  the 
presence  of  the  other  world,  and  in  the  consciousness 
of  God,  yet  there  is  no  distinct  doctrine  of  the  resur- 
rection and  of  the  life  to  come  in  the  Pentateuch.  The 
Egyptians  are  commonly  understood  to  have  had  a 
most  distinct  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  and  of  the 
life  to  come,  which  was,  indeed,  the  most  prominent 
of  all  their  religious  ideas,  the  one  kept  most  in 
evidence  by  religious  practices.  What,  then,  was  the 
doctrine  of  the  resurrection  which  Israel  brought  out 
of  Egypt  and  what  became  of  it? 

Here  is  a  very  real  difficulty  in  the  way  of  believing 
in  the  origin  of  the  Pentateuch  in  Mosaic  times.  Many 
of  the  difficulties  brought  forward  by  the  advocates 
of  the  Documentary  Theory  only  exist  on  the  supposi- 
tion that  the  Documentary  Theory,  a  particular  Docu- 
mentary Theory,  is  correct.  In  fact,  that  theory  ever 
gets  us  into  more  difficulties  than  it  gets  us  out  of. 
But  here  is  a  very  real  difficulty.  How  can  it  be  that 
a  people  just  come  out  of  a  400  year  sojourn  among 
Egyptians,  whose  ideas  of  life  after  death  were  more 
kept  in  evidence  than  were  any  other  of  their  religious 
ideas,  yet  received  religious  books  at  that  time  which 
totally  ignored  this  subject? 

It  is  to  be  noted,  however,  that  the  absence  of  escha- 
tology from  the  Pentateuch  does  not  immediately  cease 
from  troubling,  when  authorship  of  the  Pentateuch  in 
Mosaic  times  is  given  up.  It  then  begins  troubling  for 
those  who  hold  that  view  and  keeps  troubling  more  and 


232  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

more  as  the  centuries  go  by  and  eschatology  is  more 
and  more  the  subject  of  divine  teaching  in  Israel,  until, 
in  the  late  period,  from  which,  according  to  the  Docu- 
mentary Theory,  the  Pentateuch  in  its  final  form 
emanated,  it  was  one  of  the  most  prominent  subjects 
of  discussion.  Its  absence  from  the  Pentateuch  at  such 
a  time  is  many-fold  more  difficult  to  explain  than  at 
the  time  of  the  Exodus. 

But  what  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  and  of  the 
future  life  did  Israel  bring  out  of  Egypt  and  what  did 
become  of  it?  Manifestly,  they  brought  with  them 
from  Egypt  the  Egyptian  doctrine  of  the  resurrection. 
Whatever  else  they  may  have  had  or  may  not  have  had, 
they  certainly  had  this.  For  400  years  they  had  been 
breathing  a  social  and  religious  atmosphere  sur- 
charged with  eschatological  ideas,  and  moving  among 
a  people  always  busying  themselves  about  attending  to 
the  needs  of  the  dead.  So,  then,  the  doctrine  of  the 
resurrection  which  Israel  brought  out  of  Egypt,  was, 
at  least,  the  Egyptian  doctrine.  What  was  the  Egyp- 
tian Doctrine? 

1.  The  Egyptians  believed  in  another  world  which 
they  peopled  with  "gods  many  and  lords  many." 
Whether  all  the  gods  were  separate  and  distinct  divini- 
ties, or  whether,  as  is  probable,  some  gods  had  many 
different  names,  and  different  representations  to  de- 
note different  functions,  there  was  still  a  pantheon, 
many  ranks  of  gods  higher  and  lower,  which  appear  on 
the  temple  walls  or  were  represented  by  images  great 
and  small.  Professor  W.  Max  Muller,  in  the  Mythology 
of  All  Races  III,  p.  3-158),  enumerates  by  name  189 
gods  and  goddesses  and  yet  disclaims  completeness  for 
his  list. 

2.  The  Egyptians  believed  also  in  life  after  death. 


SEVENTH   INVESTIGATION  233 

The  departed  ones  are  represented  in  sculpture  and 
painting  as  in  the  other  world  associating  with  gods 
and  goddesses  and  conversing  with  them.  Soul  houses, 
even,  at  least  in  one  part  of  Egyptian  history,  the  XI 
Dynasty,  were  provided  in  the  tombs.  The  multiplicity 
of  scarabs,  symbol  of  immortality,  which  were  placed 
in  the  tombs  are  most  indicative  of  the  hopes  of  the 
people,  while  the  judgment  scene  so  frequent  in  the 
vignettes  of  papyri  and  sometimes  found  in  sculpture, 
as  at  Deir  el-Medinet,  puts  beyond  any  possible  ques- 
tion the  belief  of  the  Egyptians  in  life  after  death. 

3.  They  believed,  also,  in  immediate  transition  from 
this  life  to  the  life  to  come.  The  man  living  in  the 
other  world  they  called  the  ka  of  the  man  who  had 
lived  in  this  world.  In  a  sculpture  of  Thothmes  III 
in  the  Cairo  Museum,  the  king  is  represented  as  clasp- 
ing the  hand  of  his  ka,  shaking  hands  with  himself 
through  the  veil  between  this  life  and  the  next !  Could 
anything  more  graphically  express  the  idea  of  im- 
mediate transition  from  this  life  to  the  next? 

4.  The  Egyptians  believed,  also,  in  the  revival  of  the 
dead  man.  It  was  to  this  end  that  they  took  such  pre- 
cautions to  preserve  the  body.  This  belief  gave  rise 
to  mummification,  to  the  making  of  great,  strong, 
tombs  with  secret  devices  for  protection  against  grave- 
robbers,  and  to  the  construction,  at  last,  of  the  Great 
Pyramids,  to  give,  if  possible,  absolute  protection  to 
the  body.  The  same  earnest  hope  and  effort  led,  also, 
to  the  development  of  sculpture  in  order  to  provide  an 
artificial  body  in  case  the  natural  body  should,  after 
all,  be  destroyed.  As  the  more  exact  the  reproduction 
by  the  sculptor,  the  more  comfortable  the  dead  man 
would  be  living  in  it,  this  doctrine  resulted  in  the 


234  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

marvelous  development  of  Egyptian  portrait  sculpture 
and  portrait  bronzes. 

5.  Such  views  of  the  life  to  come  lead  directly  to  the 
most  distinguishing  characteristic  of  that  belief,  its 
grossly  materialistic  character.  The  same  body  in  the 
other  world  would  need  the  same  things  and  the  same 
attention  and  so  have  occasion  for  the  same  servants 
and  the  same  service,  and  thus  the  life  to  come  would 
be  in  every  respect,  a  reproduction  of  the  life  that  now 
is.  The  so-called  Egyptian  doctrine  of  the  resurrection 
was  not  a  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  at  all,  but  a 
doctrine  of  resuscitation  (Moses  and  the  Monuments, 
pp.  193-223). 

It  is  needless  to  ask  what  became  of  such  a  doctrine 
in  the  Pentateuch.  What  could  be  done  with  such  a 
doctrine?  The  immediate  purpose  in  the  wilderness 
teachings  was  the  inculcating  of  spiritual  ideas  of  God, 
of  the  other  world,  and  of  worship  by  God's  people  in 
this  world.  Any  mention  of  the  doctrine  of  the  resur- 
rection at  the  time  of  the  exodus  would  have  carried 
over  into  Israel's  religion  the  whole  materialistic  doc- 
trine of  resuscitation  then  prevalent  in  Egypt.  The 
only  possible  method  of  revelation  was  to  ignore  this 
doctrine  until  Israel  had  learned  spiritual  ideas.  Thus 
Israel's  sojourn  in  Egypt,  so  far  from  being  a  reason 
for  the  appearance  of  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection 
in  the  Pentateuch  is  the  best  possible  reason  for  its 
omission.  The  absence  of  eschatology  from  the  Penta- 
teuch is  thus  not  only  explicable  in  Mosaic  times,  but 
more  satisfactorily  explicable  than  at  later  times,  when 
it  was  appearing  in  other  inspired  writings. 

VI.  As  the  examination  of  the  literary  expression  of 
the  Pentateuchal  message  has  indicated  Pentateuchal 
times  to  have  been  Egyptian  times  and  Mosaic  times, 


SEVENTH   INVESTIGATION  235 

SO  the  moral  content  of  the  wilderness  message  in  com- 
parison with  both  Egyptian  and  Babylonian  religious 
forms  and  customs  show  Pentateuchal  times  to  have 
been  not  only  Mosaic  times,  and  times  of  religious  de- 
velopment, but  times  also,  of  objective  revelation. 

Is  it  possible  to  prove  objective  revelation  by  archae- 
ological evidence?  Quite  as  possible  as  to  prove  any 
other  miracle  by  historical  evidence :  the  evidence  may 
be  either  direct  or  circumstantial,  may  record  what 
took  place  or  provide  the  setting  of  the  miracle  so  that 
it  appears  in  history  as  it  appeared  in  nature.  Its 
miraculous  character  is  apparent  in  the  latter  case  by 
contrast.  No  direct  archaeological  evidence  of  objec- 
tive revelation  in  the  Mosaic  system  in  the  wilderness 
has  yet  appeared,  but  such  circumstantial  evidence  is 
available  as  makes  the  miracle  appear  in  history  as  it 
appeared  in  the  event.  Thus  its  miraculous  character 
is  seen  in  contrast. 

Two  questions  will  bring  before  us  the  archaeological 
circumstances  in  the  midst  of  which  the  Mosaic  system 
of  sacrifices  with  their  deep  significance  appeared: 
Did  the  Mosaic  System  of  sacrifices  have  a  Babylonian 
provenance,  or  did  they  have  an  Egyptian  provenance? 

Critics  of  the  advanced  school  have  uniformly  as- 
sumed, sometimes  positively  asserted,  the  Babylonian 
origin  of  the  Mosaic  system  of  sacrifices,  or,  if  there 
is  a  praxis  in  Palestine  before  the  exile  claimed  as  a 
basis,  at  least  they  assume  assimilation  to  the  Baby- 
lonian sacrifices  during  the  exile  period.  Babylonian 
archaeologists  have,  also,  frequently  made  mention  of 
the  similarity  between  Babylonian  and  Mosaic  sacri- 
fices and  sometimes  they  have  assumed  identity  and 
sometimes  have  left  it  to  the  reader  to  assume  identity. 

Examination  of  the  facts  does  not  support  the  Baby- 


236  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

Ionian  origin  of  the  Mosaic  system  of  sacrifices.  Cer- 
tain general  principles,  objects,  and  acts  of  ritual  were 
common  in  the  sacrifices  of  all  Bible  lands  in  ancient 
times.  These  common  things  of  ritual  required  in 
general  the  same  arrangements  everywhere.  Prin- 
ciples being  eternal  and  universal  may  be  transported 
and  thus  be  found  the  world  over,  so  that  they  do  not 
in  any  case,  of  themselves,  reveal  provenance. 

For  anything  in  addition  to  these  general  considera- 
tions, the  assumed  identity  of  the  Babylonian  and 
Mosaic  rituals  will  not  bear  careful  examination.  There 
was  no  laying  on  of  hands  in  the  Babylonian  sacrifices, 
while  in  the  Mosaic  sacrifices  this  was  the  most  signifi- 
cant act  of  the  ritual,  claiming,  as  it  did,  the  victim  as 
a  substitute  for  the  offerer.  The  holocaust,  also,  though 
existing  in  the  Babylonian  sacrifice,  did  not  assume 
the  place  of  prominence  or  importance  that  it  had  in 
the  Mosaic  system.  Thus  another  significant  ritual 
act,  that  of  complete  dedication,  does  not  appear  in  the 
Babylonian  sacrifices  with  anything  like  the  promi- 
nence it  has  in  the  Mosaic  sacrifices.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  Babylonian  religious  cult  consisted  largely  in 
incantations  and  divination,  both  of  which  were  ab- 
solutely forbidden  in  the  Mosaic  laws  (Lev.  XIX  :26- 
31 ;  XX  :27 ;  Deut.  XVIII  :10) .  Professor  Jastrow,  who 
cannot  be,  on  any  account,  considered  as  a  witness  pre- 
judiced against  Babylonian  origin  of  the  sacrifices, 
says,  in  arguing  that  the  Babylonian  hymns  are  of  later 
origin  than  the  incantations;  "From  this  point  of  view 
it  is  therefore  significant  to  find  the  large  place  taken 
in  the  practice  of  the  religion  by  incantation  rituals 
and  divination  practices"  (Civilization  of  Babylonia 
and  Assijria,  pp.  239-240).  Though  in  later  times 
there  were  spiritual  hymns  and  prayers,  these  incanta- 


SEVENTH   INVESTIGATION  237 

tions  were  still  retained  (Jastrow,  Civilization  of 
Babylonia  and  Assyria,  p.  240,  cf .  278 ;  cf .  also,  Sayce, 
Gifford  Lectures,  p.  242-3).  Last  of  all,  and  most  im- 
portant of  all,  the  incense  was  compounded,  not  of 
ingredients  belonging  to  the  alluvial  plains  of  Babylon, 
which,  indeed  do  not  produce  incense,  but  altogether  of 
ingredients  from  the  desert  of  Sinai  and  Arabia  and 
adjacent  places.  Not  only  is  this  known  now  because 
of  the  knowledge  of  the  products  of  those  lands,  but  it 
was  known  to  Ezekiel  and  equally  to  the  people  for 
whom  he  wrote  the  Doom  of  Tyre,  in  which  he  de- 
scribed geographically  the  region  from  which  the 
spices  of  the  incense  came,  Ezek.  XXVII  (Moses 
and  the  Monuments,  pp.  232  and  237). 

Thus,  when  we  have  eliminated  the  elements  which 
are  practically  universal  in  sacrifice  throughout  the 
orient  in  ancient  times,  there  is  very  little  in  common 
between  Babylonian  and  Mosaic  sacrifices.  At  the  same 
time  the  most  distinctive  feature  of  the  Babylonian 
ritual,  magic  and  incantation,  is  absolutely  forbidden 
in  the  Mosaic  system  and  the  one  strictly  incidental 
and  local  element,  which  might  betray  provenance,  the 
incense,  is  not  Babylonian  at  all,  but  of  western  Asia. 

Did  then  the  Mosaic  system  of  sacrifices  have  an 
Egyptian  provenance?  The  materials  are  much  the 
same  in  both  systems  of  sacrifice ;  about  the  only  ma- 
terials available.  The  method,  which,  more  than  any- 
thing else,  reveals  the  meaning,  shows  unmistakably 
that  there  is  no  resemblance  between  the  two  systems. 
There  was  no  laying  on  of  hands,  hence  no  ceremony  of 
substitution  of  the  offering  for  the  offerer ;  no  use  was 
made  of  the  blood  shed,  hence  no  redemption  by  the 
blood ;  no  holocaust,  hence  no  such  doctrine  of  complete 
dedication  as  in  the  Mosaic  sacrifices ;  and  no  sacri- 


238  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

ficial  meal,  hence  no  such  fellowship  as  is  provided  for 
in  the  Pentateuchal  system.  Thus,  of  the  four  char- 
acteristic and  significant  elements  of  the  Mosaic 
system,  substitution,  redemption  by  blood,  dedication, 
and  fellowship,  not  a  single  one  belongs  to  the  Egyptian 
system. 

Does  archaeology  provide  evidence  concerning  an 
objective  revelation?  It  does  not  provide  the  direct 
evidence  which  we  have  seen  may  attest  a  miracle,  but 
it  does  give  such  circumstantial  evidence,  as  that  the 
sudden,  startling  phenomenal  advance  in  religious  ideas 
shown  in  the  Mosaic  system  is  made  to  stand  out  in 
history,  as  it  must  have  stood  out  in  the  event.  These 
great  features  of  the  Mosaic  system  were  not  borrowed 
from  Babylonia  nor  from  Egypt,  for  neither  had  them 
to  lend.  Such  sudden  great  advance  in  religious  ideas 
cannot  be  viewed  as  a  development,  but  as  a  sudden 
outshining  of  divine  light  such  as  that  to  which  we  give 
the  name  revelation.  It  is  in  the  presence  of  such 
divine  light  that  men  believe  themselves  face  to  face 
with  GOD  (Moses  and  the  Monuments,  pp.  269-271). 


Chapter  VIII 
EIGHTH  INVESTIGATION 

Detailed  Consideration  of  the  Historical  Diffi- 
culties AND  Discrepancies  in  the  Pentateuch 

Objection  will  be  raised — indeed,  already  has  been 
raised — on  behalf  of  the  Documentary  Theory,  that 
this  proposed  solution  of  the  Pentateuchal  problem 
does  not  deal  with  the  "historical  difficulties"  which 
are  satisfactorily  met  by  the  Documentary  Theory,  dif- 
ficulties the  general  characteristics  of  which  are  care- 
fully set  forth  in  the  Oxford  Hexateuch  (Vol.  I.) . 

I.  This  proposed  solution  of  the  Pentateuchal  prob- 
lem is  primarily  a  solution  of  the  literary,  rather  than 
the  historical  difficulties,  as  is  also,  the  Documentary 
Theory;  but  it  is  not  proposed  to  neglect  these  latter 
difficulties,  much  less  leave  them  a  danger  in  the 
rear.  That  this  solution  admits  of  their  consideration 
and  relief,  even  better  than  does  the  Documentary 
Theory,  is  now  to  be  shown. 

(1)  The  peculiarities  of  vocabulary  and  style  in 
various  parts  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  the  various  divi- 
sions, or  "documents"  resulting  from  gathering  to- 
gether all  those  portions  having  like  peculiarities,  are 
the  essential  elements  of  the  Documentary  Theory,  not 
the  historical  difficulties  which  that  theory  meets.  All 
the  real  historical  difficulties  of  the  Pentateuch  belong 

239 


240  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

to  any  consideration  of  the  historical  matter  of  the 
Pentateuch ;  they  must  be  considered  by  any  proposed 
solution  of  the  Pentateuchal  problem,  and  are 
not  constituent  elements  of  any  particular  theory, 
but  rather  of  the  Pentateuchal  problem  itself. 
So  the  obligation  to  meet  these  difficulties  is 
an  obligation  to  the  Pentateuchal  problem  and  not  to 
the  Documentary  Theory.  It  is  to  meet  that  obligation 
to  the  Pentateuchal  problem  itself  and  not  to  enter 
into  controversy  with  the  Documentary  Theory  or  its 
advocates  that  consideration  is  given  to  the  subject 
here.  No  solution  of  the  Pentateuchal  problem  may 
arrogate  to  itself  mandatory  power  over  others  for  an 
accounting. 

(2)  Many  of  the  historical  difficulties  to  which  the 
advocates  of  the  Documentary  Theory  demand  answer 
of  any  one  who  presents  another  solution  of  the  Penta- 
teuchal Problem,  are  not  essential  difficulties  in  the 
Pentateuchal  Problem  at  all,  but  only  arise  on  the  as- 
sumption that  the  Documentary  Theory  is  correct.  In 
other  words,  the  Documentary  Theory  creates  many 
of  the  difficulties  which  it  has  to  meet  and  demands 
that  others  shall  meet.  In  this  the  friends  of  the  Graf- 
Wellhausen  theory  are  like  advocates  of  the  Ptolemaic 
theory  of  the  solar  system  who  should  demand  that  the 
advocates  of  the  Copernican  Theory  meet  all  the  diffi- 
culties that  the  Ptolemaic  theory  encounters,  whereas 
a  large  portion  of  these  difficulties  were  not  in  the 
problem  of  the  solar  system  at  all,  but  only  arose  on 
the  assumption  that  the  Ptolemaic  Theory  with  all  its 
cycles  and  epicycles  was  correct.  The  Documentary 
Theory  does  very  plausibly  explain  some  seeming 
anachronisms  and  other  historical  difficulties  of  the 
Pentateuchal  record,  but  it  gets  into  more  difficulty 


EIGHTH  INVESTIGATION  241 

than  it  gets  us  out  of.  More  anachronisms  and  other 
difficulties  arise  out  of  the  assumption  of  the  late  date 
of  the  Pentateuch  than  are  explained  by  it.  (Cf.  In- 
vestigation VII,  and  especially  Moses  and  the  Monu- 
ments, Light  from  Archaeology  on  Pentateuchal  Times, 
by  the  author). 

An  examination  of  the  Pentateuchal  Problem  ab 
initio,  and  not  somewhere  along  the  line  in  somebody's 
theory,  reveals  the  only  real  difficulties  that  belong  to 
the  Pentateuchal  problem.  A  careful  study  of  the 
books  of  the  Old  Testament  with  these  historical  diffi- 
culties put  forth  by  the  Documentary  Theory  constant- 
ly in  view  reveals  that  when  the  statements  of  the 
various  Old  Testament  authors  are  taken  at  their  face 
value,  many  of  these  difficulties  do  not  appear  at  all. 

(3)  It  is  hardly  to  be  doubted  that  some  historical 
statements,  and,  perhaps,  also,  a  few  laws,  were  added 
to  the  various  parts  of  the  Pentateuch  at  a  date  subse- 
quent to  the  original  composition  of  the  books  and  that 
thus  some  of  the  real  historical  difficulties  arose.  The 
account  of  the  death  and  burial  of  Moses,  or,  at  least, 
some  expressions  contained  in  the  account,  seem  from 
our  standpoint,  certainly  to  have  been  added  after  the 
events.  This  may  have  been  done  by  the  scribe  who, 
under  Moses'  direction,  had  also  written  all  the  rest  of 
the  Pentateuch,  or  it  may  have  been  written  by  Joshua 
or  some  one  else  at  a  much  later  date.  In  any  case,  its 
incorporation  into  the  books  of  Moses  is  in  exact  accord 
with  Egyptian  literary  methods;  epitaphs  are  often 
written  in  the  first  person  even  on  Egyptian  tomb- 
stones. This  included,  at  times,  even  the  account  of  the 
burial.  It  would  not  be  at  all  surprising  from  the 
standpoint  of  Egyptian  literature  to  find  books,  by  an 
author  not  long  dead,  concluding  with  the  account  of 


242  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

the  death  and  burial  of  the  author.  The  place  and 
time  and  manner  of  Moses'  death  and  his  secret  burial 
seem  to  have  been  known  to  Moses  before  hand.  The 
phrase  "to  this  day"  (Deut.  XXXIV :6)  may  easily 
have  been  the  comment  of  a  later  copyist  which  finally 
crept  into  the  text.  Altogether,  it  is  not  at  all  im- 
possible, nor  altogether  unlikely,  that  this  account  of 
the  death  and  burial  was  written  by  Moses  himself. 
But  if  it  was  written  by  some  one  later,  that  as  we 
have  just  seen,  would  not  militate  against  the  Mosaic 
authorship  of  the  Pentateuch. 

A  number  of  laws,  said  to  have  been  added  at  a  later 
date,  or  else  cited  to  prove  the  whole  code  to  be  of  later 
origin  {Oxford  Hexateuch)  are  pointed  out.  Especially 
is  emphasis  laid  upon  laws  concerning  "vineyards" 
and  "olive  orchards,"  laws  of  a  settled  agricultural  or 
horticultural  land.  But  there  is  nothing  inconsistent 
in  the  presence  of  these  laws  in  the  Pentateuch  in  the 
wilderness.  The  manifest  viewpoint  of  the  Penta- 
teuchal  writer,  if  his  statements  are  taken  in  their 
connection  and  at  their  face  value,  is  that  the  laws  of 
Exodus,  Leviticus,  and  again  in  Deuteronomy,  were 
given  with  the  expectation  of  an  immediate  entrance 
into  the  promised  land  and  life  there.  The  forty  years 
wandering  were  not  on  the  horizon  of  the  consciousness 
of  any  in  Israel  at  Sinai,  and  not,  as  an  expectation, 
on  the  plains  of  Moab.  Thus  the  laws  were  given,  in 
large  part,  whether  at  the  first  enunciation  or  in 
Deuteronomy,  not  for  life  in  the  wilderness,  but  for 
life  in  a  fertile  land  of  orchards  and  vineyards  and  of 
wine  and  oil,  given  for  a  settled  state  of  civilization  and 
not  for  a  nomadic  life,  and,  certainly,  even  in  the 
records  in  the  book  of  Numbers,  no  one  can  say  that 
there  was  any  time  when  the  hope  of  the  nation  some 
day  entering  the  promised  land  was  wanting. 


EIGHTH  INVESTIGATION  243 

(4)  Another  feature  of  archaeological  materials  and 
conditions  has  a  most  important  bearing  upon  this 
question  of  historical  difficulties  and  should  be  care- 
fully taken  into  account  before  one  proceeds  to  the 
task  of  considering  individual  historical  discrepancies. 
Many,  if  not  most,  Biblical  archaeologists  believe  that 
the  early  portions  of  the  Old  Testament  and,  perhaps 
some  of  its  later  books,  were  originally  written  in 
cuneiform  script,  the  sacred  writing,  "the  finger  of 
God,"  and  in  the  Palestinian  dialect  of  the  Babylonian 
tongue,  and  continued  in  that  script  and  tongue  cer- 
tainly for  some  time  after  that  date;  for  how  long  is 
not  certain.  At  a  later  date,  some  of  these  books,  at 
least,  were  translated  into  Aramaic;  still  later,  prob- 
ably in  the  time  of  Ezra,  when  Hebrew  was  not  only 
still  the  colloquial  dialect  of  Palestine,  but  long  before 
had  become  also  a  literary  language,  a  final  complete 
translation  was  made  into  the  Hebrew  language  and 
written  in  the  Hebrew  script  (Cf.  Naville,  Archaeology 
of  the  Bible). 

Most  interesting  and  important  results  come  directly 
from  this  fact,  if  it  is,  as  seems  most  probable,  a  fact, 
that  the  Pentateuch  was  originally  written  in  Palestin- 
ian cuneiform,  and  later  translated  into  Aramaic  and 
then  into  Hebrew.  For  one  thing,  the  writing  of  the 
original  of  the  Pentateuch  on  tablets  accounts  most 
naturally  for  much  of  the  repetitiousness  which  is 
claimed  and  really  exists  in  the  Pentateuchal  writings. 
It  was  not  easy  to  refer  to  a  tablet  book  as  we  make 
reference  to  volume  and  page.  Tablets  were  not  made 
in  editions ;  or,  to  express  it  in  another  way,  each  sepa- 
rate book  was  a  separate  edition.  Thus  a  reference 
could  be  good  only  for  one  particular  copy  of  a  book. 
Naturally  it  was  not  customary  to  make  references,  but 


244  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

instead,  to  repeat  what  had  been  said.  And,  as  books 
were  scarce  and  references  practically  impossible,  it  be- 
came the  literary  habit  not  even  to  copy  exactly,  but  to 
use  free  quotation.  This  was  the  literary  habit  down  to 
the  time  of  our  Lord  who  thus  quoted  the  Septuagint. 
Then  a  new  tablet  in  a  book  was  in  some  sense  a  new 
book;  it  was  far  more  physically  separated  from  the 
preceding  tablets  of  the  book  than  is  a  chapter  in  a 
modern  book  from  preceding  chapters.  Yet  even  chap- 
ters in  modern  books  often  begin  with  a  resume, 
especially  if  the  subject  be  historical.  How  much  more 
necessary  then,  that  a  new  tablet  should  begin  with  a 
brief  repetition  of  what  had  gone  before  in  order  to 
get  a  starting  point  for  the  matter  on  the  tablet.  Thus, 
in  the  account  of  creation,  the  Creation  tablet  was 
complete  in  itself.  The  Fall  tablet  needed  a  brief 
resume  of  creation  to  give  a  proper  starting  point  for 
the  account  of  the  Fall  and  the  brief  repetition  is  not 
slavish  in  quotation,  but  adapts  itself  rather  to  what 
is  to  follow.  So  the  long  flood  account  would  occupy 
several  tablets  with  corresponding  "doublets,"  and 
other  historical  peculiarities  growing  out  of  the  literary 
materials  and  habits  of  the  time.  Thus  the  existence 
of  these  repetitions,  in  fact,  may  be  admitted  freely 
without  impairing  the  unity  of  authorship,  and,  more- 
over, they  furnish  explanations  of  some  of  the  peculiari- 
ties of  historical  statement. 

Again,  another  result  of  the  original  method  of  writ- 
ing Scripture,  harmonizing  with  some  of  the  sugges- 
tions of  historical  critics  and  at  the  same  time  resolving 
some  of  the  difficulties  that  trouble  them,  is  that  the 
translation  into  Aramaic  and  then  into  Hebrew  at  a 
later  date  introduced  historical  and  sociological  imag- 
ery of  that  time,  not  living  vital  imagery,  but  fossil  im- 


EIGHTH  INVESTIGATION  245 

agery,  embedded  in  the  etymology  of  the  words  and 
forms,  yet  containing  allusions  to  later  things.  These 
allusions  having  the  appearance  of  anachronisms  give 
rise  to  the  claim  of  historical  critics  for  a  later  date  for 
the  origin  of  the  writings.  A  knowledge  of  the  facts  in 
the  case  thus  resolves  all  these  historical  difficulties 
without  the  suppositions  of  late  authorship  and  various 
authors. 

Consider  for  a  moment  what  would  happen,  if 
critical  microscopes  were  fixed  upon  words  of  our 
present  English  translation  of  these  same  Scriptures. 
How  many  historical  allusions  involving  ridiculous 
anachronisms  would  appear,  if  the  etymology  and 
natural  history  of  the  words  should  be  scrutinized  and 
magnified.  The  number  of  obsolete  words  rejected  in 
the  later  English  translations  give  some  hint  of  the 
number  of  later  words  introduced  in  a  translation  of 
the  Old  Testament  into  Hebrew  in  the  days  of  Ezra.  Of 
course,  many  historical  indications  would  be  found  in 
those  words,  when  closely  pressed.  But  why  press 
them  any  more  than  words  of  the  English  translation 
of  today?  Words  mean  what  they  are  intended  to 
mean  by  those  who  use  them  and  not  every  vagary  of 
meaning  that  can  be  found  in  the  fossilized  strata  of 
etymology. 

(5)  In  any  case,  upon  any  view  of  the  Pentateuch, 
there  are  some  discrepancies,  historical  difficulties  that 
give  serious  trouble.  It  is  to  be  expected  on  a  priori 
grounds  that  occidental  readers  would  find  such  dis- 
crepancies in  oriental  literature.  They  are  probably 
no  more  frequent  or  troublesome  than  present  them- 
selves to  the  oriental  mind  upon  the  perusal  of  the  best 
models  of  occidental  history.  "East  is  east  and  west 
is  west" ;  there  are  radically  different  view-points  and 


246  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

mental  habits.  So  there  are  found  historical  difficul- 
ties, real  difficulties,  in  the  Old  Testament.  Such  are 
the  lists  of  kings  in  Edom  (Gen.  XXXVI  :31-39)  and 
the  way  in  which  the  episode  of  Judah  and  Thamar 
(Gen.  XXXVIII)  fits  into,  or  does  not  seem  to  fit 
into,  the  narrative.  These  historical  difficulties  look 
sometimes  like  absolute  contradictions  or  absurdities. 
We  may  well  be  very  slow  to  assert  contradictions  in 
the  Bible  or  anywhere  else  in  serious  and  credible  liter- 
ature. The  human  mind  does  not  naturally  admit  con- 
tradictions; it  abhors  them  and  so  does  not  set  forth 
palpable  ones.  Apparent  contradictions  of  ordinarily 
credible  witnesses,  as  in  evidence  in  courts  of  law  or 
elsewhere,  are  usually  only  opposite  segments  of  the 
same  circle  of  truth;  or,  at  least,  segments  not  con- 
tiguous; something  is  omitted  between  them.  Specta- 
tors standing  in  a  circle  about  the  night-blooming 
Cereus  will  give  different  accounts  of  the  opening  of 
its  glories.  These  differences  are  not  contradictions 
or  discrepancies  to  which  attaches  any  discredit;  they 
only  present  truth  from  different  standpoints  on  the 
circle.  The  same  phenomena  are  to  be  expected  from 
the  statements  of  different  historians  standing  at  dif- 
ferent points  round  about  an  event,  or  between  his- 
torians and  their  readers  which  latter  are  in  the  posi- 
tion of  one  historian  reviewing  another.  These  dif- 
ferences and  discrepancies  are  not  contradictions.  The 
historian  and  his  readers  have  glimpses  of  the  truth 
from  diferent  points  on  the  circle. 

(6)  The  best  test  of  any  explanation  is  its  practical 
application ;  test  this  new  solution  of  the  Pentateuchal 
Problem  thus.  It  is  very  easy  to  raise  objections  to  the 
solution,  if  one  does  not  actually  try  it  for  himself. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  is  only  necessary  for  any  one  to 


EIGHTH  INVESTIGATION  247 

go  over  the  law  books  in  the  Pentateuch  and  note  care- 
fully, and  in  detail,  these  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws 
and  the  divisions  of  the  Pentateuchal  material  which 
they  afford;  to  be  entirely  satisfied  that  here  is  the 
solution  of  the  main  Pentateuchal  problems,  the  pecul- 
iarities of  style  and  vocabulary  in  its  different  portions 
and  the  fragmentary  presentation  of  its  laws  inter- 
spersed with  narrative.  If  so,  then  the  historical  dif- 
ficutlies  must  all  be  considered  from  this  standpoint, 
and  not  from  the  standpoint  of  the  Documentary 
Theory. 

II.  It  is  now  in  order  to  consider  how  historical  dif- 
ficulties are  to  be  met  in  detail  from  this  standpoint. 

( 1 )  In  the  presentation  of  the  Documentary  Theory 
by  Kautzsch  (Literature  of  the  Old  Test,  ad  loc.)  the 
blessing  of  Jacob  in  Genesis  (Gen.  XLIX)  as  well  as 
the  promises  of  Joshua  in  the  book  of  Joshua  (XXIII, 
XXIV)  are  found  to  present  great  historical  difficul- 
ties immediately  upon  the  acceptance  of  the  view-point 
of  the  Documentary  Theory,  which  regards  these  ex- 
plicit statements  not  as  prophecy,  but  as  history;  but 
they  involve  no  historical  difficulty,  whatever,  from 
the  view-point  of  the  sacred  writer,  who  put  these  state- 
ments forth  as  predictive  prophecy. 

In  the  discourse  of  Balaam,  Num.  XXIV:  17,  it  is 
said  "I  shall  see  him,  but  not  now ;  I  shall  behold  him. 
but  not  nigh :  there  shall  come  a  star  out  of  Jacob,  and 
a  scepter  shall  rise  out  of  Israel,  and  shall  smite  the 
corners  of  Moab,  and  destroy  all  the  children  of  Seth." 
It  is  objected  that  this  presents  historical  difficulties 
(Kautzsch,  Lit.  of  0.  T.  p.  16).  But  the  claim  of  the 
Pentateuchal  writer  is  that  this  is  predictive  prophecy, 
it  is  a  part  of  the  glorious  hope  which,  according  to 
the  claims  of  the  sacred  writers  themselves,  runs  all 


248  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

the  way  through  revelation  from  the  Prot-evangelium 
to  the  consummation.  Historical  difficulty  here  only 
arises  on  the  assumption  of  the  Documentary  Theory 
that  this  statement,  as,  indeed,  nearly  all  similar  state- 
ments that  go  before  and  that  follow,  are  historical.  It 
is  the  theory  that  creates  the  difficulty  here,  and,  in- 
deed, not  here  only,  but  that  disrupts  the  whole  line  of 
Messianic  hope,  which  the  plain  standpoint  of  the 
sacred  writings  puts  before  us,  and  constructs  a  very 
different  hope  that  begins  thousands  of  years  later  and 
is,  at  best,  no  more  than  an  after-thought. 

The  blessings  of  Moses  upon  the  tribes  in  Deuteron- 
omy (XXXIII)  are  likewise  treated  as  historical  char- 
acterizations of  the  various  tribes  made  long  after  the 
settlement  in  Palestine  and  flung  back  upon  the  screen 
of  antiquity.  Here  again  the  passage  presents  no  diffi- 
culty, if  the  claim  of  the  Biblical  writer  for  the 
prophetic  character  of  what  he  writes  may  be  allowed. 
Only  when  the  predictive  element  is  disallowed  and  the 
v/hole  passage  assumed  to  be  historical,  is  there  any 
difficulty.  This  is  to  say,  the  Theory  has  created  the 
difficulty  which  it  in  turn  resolves  and  then  demands 
of  every  one  who  discusses  the  Pentateuchal  Problem 
that  he,  also,  shall  resolve  it.  But  the  Pentateuchal 
Problem  in  itself,  aside  from  the  Documentary  Theory 
and  all  the  assumptions  and  claims  that  go  with  it, 
knows  no  such  difficulty. 

In  endeavoring  to  distinguish  the  E  Document,  from 
the  J  Document  in  the  address  of  Joshua  (XXIV) 
Kautzsch  says  (Lit.  of  0.  T.  p.  44),  "No  doubt  this  is 
a  prophetic  historiography,  but,  on  the  whole,  it  no 
longer  conveys  the  impression  of  a  triumphant  outlook 
on  a  glorious  future,  but  rather  that  of  a  retrospect  on 
bygone  history,  in  which  were  many  gloomy  experi- 


EIGHTH  INVESTIGATION  249 

ences.  Thus,  very  specially  all  through  the  concluding 
chapter,  Josh.  XXIV,  this  sentence  resounds;  Perhaps 
there  is  yet  time  to  avert  destruction  by  sincerely  giv- 
ing up  idolatry  and  turning  to  Jehovah."  There  are 
certainly  accounts  of  gloomy  experiences,  but  this 
gloomy  view  is  distinctly  presented  as  really  prophetic 
in  Joshua  XXIV,  and  even  viewed  as  a  retrospect  was 
even  more  appropriate  to  Joshua's  time  than  to  the 
time  of  a  writer  of  the  eighth  century. 

Samuel's  address  on  the  "manner  of  the  king"  (I 
Sam.  VIIL:  10-18)  is  another  instance  of  the  "historical 
difficulties"  into  which  the  Documentary  Theory  falls 
and  which  its  advocates  would  shove  off  onto  others 
also.  But  it  is  the  same  difficulty  arising  out  of  the 
assuming  of  an  historical  element,  instead  of  a  pre- 
dictive element.  Kautzsch  says  (page  45),  "Sharply 
the  standpoint  of  this  source  is  distinguished  from  the 
later  Samuel  and  Saul  stories.  The  kingdom  is  no 
longer  a  blessing,  but  a  curse  to  the  people."  The 
assumption  of  the  Theory  that  everything  that  correct- 
ly, and  in  detail,  reflects  historical  conditions  must 
have  been  written  after  those  conditions  existed 
creates  the  difficulty  here  as  in  so  many  other  places. 
The  view-point  of  the  sacred  writer  in  this  passage  is 
that  Samuel  delivered  this  as  a  prediction  before  the 
events;  admit  this  predictive  element  in  prophecy  and 
this  historical  difficulty  does  not  appear  at  all. 

It  would  be  an  almost  endless  task  to  consider  all 
the  historical  difficulties  raised  by  various  critics  and 
thrust  forward  for  solution  by  every  one  who  essays 
to  discuss  the  Pentateuchal  Problem.  The  patience  of 
both  writer  and  reader  would  be  exhausted  long  before 
the  list  was  exhausted.  It  will  be  enough  now  to  con- 
sider various  instances  cited  under  the  three  kinds  of 


250  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

difficulties  as  they  are  presented  in  the  Oxford  Hexa- 
teuch  (Vol.  I). 

"I.  The  different  religious  institutions  of  the  Penta- 
teuch, in  ordinances  and  in  sacrifice,  betray  the  ideas 
of  different  and  later,  historical  periods." 

It  is  argued  that  the  different  Documents  take  dif- 
ferent views  of  the  persons  who  may  offer  sacrifice 
(Vol.  I,  p.  50),  J  and  E,  it  is  claimed,  allow  great  free- 
dom, while  P  allows  only  the  priests,  the  sons  of  Aaron, 
to  offer  sacrifice.  Therefore  these  different  ideas  and 
usages  came  from  different  times  and  so  from  different 
authors.  But  this  difficulty  only  exists  after  the  Pen- 
tateuch has  been  separated  into  the  various  documents 
on  the  assumption  that  El,  El-Shaddai  and  Jehovah 
represent  the  religious  conceptions  of  different  authors. 
Then,  with  these  separated  portions  of  the  Pentateuch 
before  him,  the  critic  finds  in  the  J  and  E  accounts 
many  sacrifices  offered  by  many  persons  among  the 
patriarchs  of  whom  they  write,  while  in  P,  who  gives 
account  of  later  times,  he  finds  only  the  priests,  the 
sons  of  Aaron,  offering  sacrifice  and  does  not  find  any 
mention  of  Abel  and  of  Noah  and  of  Abraham.  And 
his  poor  soul  is  troubled;  he  concludes  that  these 
various  representations  describe  different  times.  Of 
course  they  do ;  they  patently  are  speaking  of  different 
times,  but  may  not  one  writer  at  one  time  write  of  dif- 
ferent events  at  different  times  in  the  history  of  revela- 
tion as  well  as  in  the  history  of  the  world?  On  the 
other  hand,  the  part  of  the  Pentateuch  which  has  been 
set  off  by  itself  as  the  P  Document  is  not  speaking, 
is  not  professing  to  speak,  of  Patriarchal  times  and 
persons,  but  of  the  Aaronic  priesthood  and  its  duties. 
The  reader  with  the  whole  undissected  body  of  the 
Pentateuch  before  him  finds  no  such  "historical  diffi- 


EIGHTH  INVESTIGATION  251 

culty" ;  there  he  finds  these  patriarchs  offering  sacri- 
fice in  their  proper  place  and  he  finds  priests,  also, 
(Ex.  XIX:19-24)  ;  and  then,  at  the  proper  historical 
period,  according  to  the  whole  narrative  in  the  Penta- 
teuch, he  finds  the  Aaronic  priesthood  also  introduced. 
Thus  this  "historical  difficulty"  is  one  created  by  the 
Documentary  Theory,  which  theory  is  then  put  for- 
ward with  great  pride  to  solve  it!  Well,  it  is  a  poor 
process  that  cannot  account  for  its  own  output. 

Again  it  is  averred  that  the  different  documents  take 
different  views  of  the  place  at  which  sacrifice  was 
permitted.  According  to  JE,  it  is  said,  there  is  no  re- 
striction in  the  place,  *'In  all  places  where  I  record  my 
name  I  will  come  unto  thee,  and  I  will  bless  thee"  (Ex. 
XX:24).  The  Oxford  Hexateuch  (Vol.  I,  p.  50)  re- 
marks that  "the  rule  cannot  possibly  be  limited  to  the 
period  preceding  the  construction  of  the  desert  sanctu- 
ary, for  it  is  announced  as  of  universal  application." 
Here  we  have  the  fallacy  of  assuming  universality 
where  it  does  not  exist,  one  of  the  most  common  of  all 
formal  fallacies.  The  universality  here  in  this  promise 
is  distinctly  not  of  time,  but  of  place,  "in  every  place," 
and  even  the  universality  of  place  has  distinct  limita- 
tion to  the  "places  where  I  record  my  name."  More- 
over, not  only  is  the  universality  not  of  time,  but  uni- 
versality of  God's  law,  or  any  other  law  in  any  case,  is 
only  in  force  as  long  as  the  law  is  in  force.  When  the 
law  is  fulfilled  or  abrogated  either  by  repeal  or  by 
being  supplanted  by  another,  its  universality  ceases 
absolutely  as  the  law  itself  ceases. 

The  same  distinguished  editors  of  the  Oxford  Hexa- 
teuch (Vol.  I,  p.  51)  say  that  "The  Deuteronomic  law 
was  intended  to  refer  to  Jerusalem"  and  quote  I  Kings 
VIII:  16  in  proof  of  it:  "Since  the  day  that  I  brought 


252  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

forth  my  people  Israel  out  of  Egypt,  I  chose  no  city 
out  of  all  the  tribes  of  Israel  to  build  an  house,  that 
my  name  might  be  therein;  but  I  chose  David  to  be 
over  my  people  Israel."  The  claim  is  that  this  state- 
ment in  I  Kings  ignores  altogether  the  story  of  the 
Tabernacle  at  Shiloh  and  the  implication  of  the  argu- 
ment is  that  there  was  no  Tabernacle  at  Shiloh  nor  in 
the  wilderness.  But  the  statement  in  I  Kings  VIII:  16 
does  not  ignore  the  Tabernacle  at  Shiloh.  It  makes  no 
reference  to  the  Tabernacle  at  Shiloh  nor  to  any  other 
tabernacle  but  to  the  choosing  of  a  city  to  "build  an 
house."  No  house  was  built  at  Shiloh ;  the  Tabernacle 
was  moved  there,  and,  in  the  wilderness,  the  Taber- 
nacle was  a  travelling  sanctuary.  Jerusalem  was, 
without  any  exception  or  limitations,  the  first  city  of 
the  tribes  of  Israel  chosen  "to  build  an  house."  This 
"historical  difficulty"  does  not  exist  in  the  text  of 
Scripture  at  all,  but  is  merely  a  requirement  of  the 
Documentary  Theory,  which,  in  turn,  the  Theory 
meets ;  but  there  is  no  reason  why  any  one  should  meet 
it  in  the  name  of  the  Pentateuchal  Problem. 

Concerning  the  Tabernacle,  it  is  asserted  {Oxford 
Hexateuch,  Vol.  I,  p.  52),  "that  it  is  a  singular  cir- 
cumstance that  in  the  present  text,  the  first  mention 
of  the  place  of  this  Tent,  Ex.  XXXIII  :7,  represents  it 
as  actually  in  use  before  it  was  made!"  That  would, 
indeed,  be  a  ridiculous  "historical  difficulty" — if  it 
existed  The  serious  setting  forth  of  this  "difficulty" 
in  the  Oxford  Hexateuch  is  a  much  greater  and  a  very 
real  "difficulty."  The  merest  tyro  in  Hebrew  should 
know  that  the  word  for  Tabernacle,  or  tent,  in  this 
passage,  Ohel,  is  a  common  noun  meaning  a  "tent,"  a 
"tent  of  skins  or  of  cloth."  It  is  one  of  the  words  taken 
up  into  the  Egyptian  of  the  Exodus  period  from  the 


EIGHTH  INVESTIGATION  253 

Hebrew  of  the  Israelite  slaves  among  them.  This  word 
only  became  a  proper  noun  commonly  translated 
"Tabernacle"  in  the  one  instance  of  the  tent  con- 
structed after  the  "pattern  showed  thee  in  the 
mount."  Moses  is  said  (Ex.  XXXIII  :7)  to  have  taken 
the  headquarters  tent,  put  it  outside  the  camp  and 
called  it  the  "tent  of  meeting,"  until  the  Tabernacle 
according  to  the  "pattern  showed  in  the  mount"  was 
constructed. 

Following  the  analysis  of  the  subject  of  "historical 
difficulties"  in  the  Oxford  Hexateuch,  we  find  it  as- 
serted, 

"11.  That  different  religious  ideas  in  the  Pentateuch 
betray  later  historical  periods  in  the  history  of  Israel." 

One  of  these  "ideas"  is  the  knowledge  of  the  divine 
name  Jehovah.  It  is  said  {Oxford  Hexateuch,  Vol.  I, 
p.  56),  "On  the  one  hand  the  knowledge  of  Jehovah 
existed  from  primeval  times,  and  sacrifice  and  prayer 
were  continuous  from  generation  to  generation.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  sacred  name  was  first  made  known 
to  Moses  as  the  privilege  and  assurance  of  Israel's  de- 
liverance." This,  of  course,  refers  to  Ex.  VI  :3.  "And  I 
appeared  unto  Abraham,  unto  Isaac  and  unto  Jacob, 
by  the  name  of  God  Almighty,  but  by  my  name  Jehovah 
was  I  not  known  to  them." 

The  assertion  of  "historical  difficulty"  here  involves 
the  very  common  fallacy  of  seeking  for  discord.  When 
historical  difficulties  appear  in  evidence,  the  only  cor- 
rect method  is  to  consider  all  possible  interpretations 
to  see  if  there  is  any  way  in  which  the  statements  may 
be  true.  Instead,  this  fallacy  seizes  upon  one  interpre- 
tation according  to  which  the  words  cannot  be  true  and 
presses  that  interpretation  to  the  disastrous  end.  It 
is  as  though  one  came  to  the  forks  of  the  road,  and  in- 


254  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

stead  of  searching  all  ways  to  find  the  right  path,  took 
the  wrong  path  and  followed  it  to  the  precipice  and 
insisted  upon  jumping  over.  We  must  respectfully  de- 
cline to  jump  over  here.  A  very  little  enquiry  in  arch- 
aeology would  reveal  to  the  critic  that  "knowing  a 
name"  and  "being  given  a  name"  had,  in  ancient  times, 
in  Bible  lands,  and,  indeed,  in  modern  times,  where 
primitive  conditions  prevail,  the  same  significance  as 
in  business  or  in  social  life  among  ourselves.  To  "give 
one's  name"  to  another  in  business  or  in  marriage  is 
not  to  make  known  to  that  one  a  name  never  before 
heard  of !  but  to  give  the  right  to  use  the  name.  Thus, 
giving  the  Name  in  the  Old  Testament  has  its  counter- 
part in  the  New  Testament  in  asking  "in  the  Name." 

Once  more  the  Oxford  Hexateuch  says: 

"III.  That  the  language  of  different  parts  of  the 
Pentateuch  betrays  different  and  later  sources  and 
authorship,  in  comparison  with  the  language  of  dif- 
ferent later  authors,  e.g.  Ezekiel  and  Jeremiah." 

Among  the  "historical  difficulties"  claimed  in  the 
book  of  Deuteronomy  is  one  based  upon  the  words  "The 
place  which  Jehovah  shall  choose  to  place  his  name 
there."  The  question  is  asked,  "Why  should  the  dwell- 
ing which  was  already  in  their  midst,  be  so  persist- 
ently ignored?"  This  ironical  question  assumes,  of 
course,  that  the  Tabernacle  did  not  exist  at  the  time  of 
the  composition  of  Deuteronomy  and  so  was  not  "in 
their  midst." 

This  "historical  difficulty"  is,  also,  entirely  created 
by  the  Documentary  Theory  whose  advocates  are  so 
much  concerned  about  its  solution.  That  theory  takes 
the  book  of  Deuteronomy  out  of  its  own  historical  set- 
ting and  places  it  at  a  much  later  date  in  the  days  of 
Josiah,  when  for  some  seven  centuries  the  people  had 


EIGHTH  INVESTIGATION  255 

been  in  possession  of  their  inheritance  in  the  Promised 
Land.  In  the  historical  setting  given  Deuteronomy  in 
the  Pentateuchal  history,  there  is  no  difficulty  at  all. 
According  to  the  Pentateuchal  history  the  people  were 
about  to  enter  the  Promised  Land.  The  book  of  Deu- 
teronomy, notwithstanding  its  reminiscences  of  the 
wilderness  history  for  the  purpose  of  exhortation,  is  a 
forward  looking  hook.  It  is  set  forth  as  the  statesman- 
like addresses  of  a  great  leader  in  anticipation  of  im- 
mediate entrance  of  the  people  into  their  inheritance 
and  their  continued  dwelling  there.  Why  then  should 
he  be  speaking  to  the  people  about  the  Tabernacle 
among  them  with  which  every  one  was  familiar?  His 
theme  was  the  life  before  them  and  preparation  for  it. 

The  duplicate  laws  concerning  the  cities  of  Refuge 
(Num.  XXXV  and  Deut.  XIX)  also,  come  in  for  a 
place  among  the  "historical  difficulties."  "Why 
should  a  leader,  already  divinely  warned  that  he  must 
die,  issue  two  such  laws  in  a  few  weeks  interval?" 
{Oxford  Hexateuch,  Vol.  I,  p.  66).  It  would  be  hard 
to  see  why  anybody  should  do  such  a  thing,  not  to 
mention  the  difficulty  of  anybody  doing  anything  in 
the  "interval"  between  doing  things!  There  is  here 
a  real  difficulty,  that  is  not  created  by  the  Documen- 
tary Theory.  But  it  is  a  difficulty  which  only  needs 
close  attention  to  the  circumstances  of  each  giving  of 
the  law  in  order  to  fade  entirely  away. 

The  record  of  the  law  of  the  cities  of  Refuge  in 
Numbers  represents  the  original  law  as  given  by  Moses 
in  the  oral  teaching  of  the  people  and  as  recorded  in 
the  journalistic  account  of  the  wanderings  and  instruc- 
tion in  the  wilderness.  After  (not  in)  a  "few  weeks 
interval,"  Moses,  the  statesman,  made  public  addresses 


256  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

to  the  people  for  the  purpose  of  exhorting  them  con- 
cerning the  new  life  upon  which  they  were  about  to 
enter.  Nothing  is  certainly  more  to  be  expected  in 
these  addresses  than  that  this  new  law,  but  recently 
given  them,  should  come  in  for  full  statement  and  elu- 
cidation. The  Statute  of  Judgment  in  Deuteronomy 
is  somewhat  changed.  There  are  additions  and  ex- 
planations, but,  in  every  case,  they  are  like  the  reser- 
vations recently  proposed  by  the  Senate  of  the  United 
States  to  the  Covenant  of  the  League  of  Nations ;  they 
only  state  explicitly  what  is  the  intended  meaning  of 
the  formal  law  in  Numbers  or  what  is  to  be  expected 
in  the  application  of  it.  They  are  just  such  changes 
as  are  to  be  expected  in  the  public  addresses  of  a 
lawgiver  upon  a  new  law  but  recently  promulgated 
and  needing  to  be  popularized  among  the  people.  When 
we  consider  how  radical  was  this  change  in  the  carry- 
ing out  of  the  inveterate  blood-feud,  we  cannot  won- 
der that  Moses  should  so  fully  improve  this  oppor- 
tunity to  promote  the  mitigation  of  the  cruel  customs 
of  the  people  by  dwelling  emphatically  upon  the  new 
law. 

Thus  it  is  not  true,  as  implied  in  the  question  quoted 
from  the  Oxford  Hexateuch  above,  that  Moses  promul- 
gated two  laws  on  the  same  subject  with  an  interval 
of  only  a  few  weeks  between  them.  Rather  he  pro- 
mulgated one  law,  and  a  few  weeks  later  delivered  a 
public  address  on  the  same  subject.  The  "difficulty" 
here  needs  only  a  proper  understanding  of  the  cir- 
cumstances in  order  to  cease  to  be  difficult, 

(2)  A  final,  and  the  most  important  of  all  "histori- 
cal, difficulties"  is,  also,  a  very  real  difficulty;  the 
giving  of  the  law  of  the  unity  of  worship  in  the  wilder- 


EIGHTH  INVESTIGATION  257 

ness  period  and  worship  at  many  centers  and  the  sacri- 
fice at  many  altars  down  until  the  close  of  Samuel's 
administration.  Here  again  it  is  only  necessary  to 
understand  the  situation  in  order  to  understand  the 
difficulty.  But  in  order  to  understand  the  situation  it 
is  necessary  for  the  historical  imagination  to  visualize 
a  more  than  four  hundred  year  moving  picture  of 
national  life  and  religious  progress.  That  the  idea  of 
unity  of  worship  and  a  central  sanctuary  was  of  the 
very  essential  substance  of  the  religious  life  of  the 
people  is  manifest  from  the  readiness  of  the  tribes  west 
of  the  Jordan,  immediately  after  the  conquest  and  the 
settlement,  to  plunge  the  tribes  into  civil  war  to  compel 
the  tribes  east  of  the  Jordan  to  respect  the  central 
place  of  worship  (Josh.  XXII:ll-20),  and  the  equally 
vehement  denial  and  protest  of  the  tribes  east  of  the 
Jordan  that  their  intent  was  to  remind  themselves  and 
their  descendants  forever  of  the  unity  of  worship 
and  the  central  place  of  worship,  the  very  opposite  of 
the  intent  of  which  they  were  suspected  (Josh.  XXII : 
21-29).  That  the  central  place  of  worship  was  main- 
tained at  Shiloh  down  until  the  ark  was  taken  away 
and  stolen  by  the  Philistines  is  eqully  manifest  from 
I  Samuel  IV  :4,  and  even  after  the  ark  was  gone  from 
Shiloh,  though  the  presence  of  the  Ark  was  deemed 
essential  to  completeness  of  worship. 

But  the  solution  of  this  difficulty  does  not  lie  only 
in  these  very  patent  facts,  but  rests  upon  more  funda- 
mental and  remote  facts  and  upon  eternal  principles. 
The  Pentateuch  is  a  record  of  revelation  and  of  divinely 
directed  leadership.  It  is  ideal,  what  God  would  have 
the  people  be  and  do,  and  only  to  a  very  small  extent 
sociological,  a  record  of  what  the  people  were  and  did. 
Has  any  one  supposed  for  a  moment  that  the  people 


258  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

we7-e  like  the  book  ?  In  the  record  of  the  period  of  the 
Judges  we  learn  what  the  people  were  like.  The  rec- 
ords of  that  period  are  records  of  the  life  and  char- 
acter of  the  people  and  are  of  a  piece  with  the  brief 
records  of  life  in  the  Pentateuch.  Here  is  a  sharp  con- 
trast between  precept  and  practice,  between  revelation 
and  life.  Here  in  the  book  of  Judges  is  a  sociological 
record  in  the  broadest  sense.  It  gives  us  a  glimpse  of 
the  trying  out  of  the  theocracy.  The  contrast  between 
the  idealism  of  the  books  of  the  Law  and  the  realism 
of  this  sociological  record  is  disheartening.  But  is  it 
surprising  or  strange?  Does  it  present  any  real  per- 
plexity in  the  problems  of  national  progress  ?  Is  it  any 
more  disheartening  than  the  history  of  the  conflict  of 
the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ  with  the  heathenism  of  the 
Roman  Empire  or  the  contrast  between  the  preaching 
of  the  missionaries  in  the  Celestial  Empire  and  the 
common  life  in  the  same  communities  of  China  today? 
Is  it  so  much  worse  than  the  contrast  between  the 
Book  in  America  and  England  in  this  XXth  century 
and  life  in  their  great  cities,  when  iniquity  is  uncov- 
ered? Is  Christendom  anywhere  in  the  world,  at  any 
time  in  the  world,  to  be  compared  with  the  ideal  of 
the  book  ?  Then  we  may  not  wonder  that  the  record  of 
the  life  of  the  people  after  the  conquest  fell  so  far 
below  the  ideal  set  before  them  in  the  Pentateuch. 

Only  the  Pentateuch  in  the  wilderness  can  account 
for  the  emergence,  within  four  hundred  years,  of  the 
religious  establishment  and  the  imperial  glory  of  the 
days  of  David  and  Solomon.  If  mere  heathenism  could 
develop  into  such  high  moral  and  religious  ideas  and 
life,  why  has  it  never  done  so  elsewhere?  Three 
millenniums  of  Jewish  life  since  that  time  give  no 


EIGHTH  INVESTIGATION  259 

ground  for  belief  in  such  racial  distinction  morally 
and  spiritually  as  that  there  should  be  such  unaided 
development  among  the  people  of  Israel.  Yet  there 
are  some  things  which  help  us  to  understand  the  prog- 
ress which  prepared  for  the  emergence.  It  is  the 
way  of  God's  law  and  of  providence  in  the  world.  There 
is  a  long  period  of  gestation  and  then  a  birth.  Not  a 
mere  infinitesimal  step  forward  in  evolution,  but  an 
eve7it.  The  birth  of  an  idea,  the  birth  of  an  individual, 
the  birth  of  a  nation,  the  birth  of  a  religion  is  always 
an  event.  "A  nation  shall  be  born  in  a  day."  To 
whatever  a  nation  is  bom,  it  is  always  born  thus.  A 
birth  is  a  breaking  forth. 

So,  holding  up  our  two  problems  to  the  mirror  of 
history,  the  problem  of  the  abrupt  descent  to  the 
Judges  and  the  problem  of  the  sudden  emergence  at 
the  Monarchy,  we  see  their  reflection  in  a  thousand 
places.  It  does  not  take  away  all  the  mystery  of  the 
problems  to  see  them  thus  duplicated  so  many  times. 
But  it  does  take  away  any  suspicion  of  unreality  from 
the  Bible  narrative  that  contains  them.  Thus  irregu- 
larities that  may  exist  in  the  religious  conduct  of  the 
people  in  the  days  of  Samuel  do  not  discredit  the  Pen- 
tateuchal  narrative.  (Cf.  The  Deciding  Voice  of  the 
Monuments  in  Biblical  Criticism,  the  Author,  pp. 
261-266). 


Chapter  IX 

NINTH  INVESTIGATION 

The  Composition  of  the  Pentateuch  According  to 
THE  Archaeology  of  the  Bible  and  the 

Monuments 

The  relation  of  the  heavenly  bodies  one  to  another 
is  the  problem  of  astronomy.  It  has  been  solved; 
solved  by  a  solution  made  up  entirely  of  known  facts. 
The  problem  of  world-building,  how  the  heavenly 
bodies  came  to  be  so  related  to  each  other  is  a  totally 
different  problem,  a  problem  of  physics.  Philoso- 
phers of  all  ages  from  the  earliest  times  have  pon- 
dered this  problem,  and  physicists  of  this  later  sci- 
entific age  have  exhausted  all  the  means  of  research  to 
discover  this  secret  of  nature,  but  it  still  eludes  all. 
This  problem  has  never  been  solved.  Many  theories 
have  been  presented,  some  of  them  more,  and  some 
of  them  less  probable;  but  none  of  these  theories  has 
been  attested  by  indisputable  facts,  nor  ever  will  be  so 
proved  scientifically,  for  no  one  has  been  permitted 
to  look  in  upon  world-building. 

The  relation  of  the  parts  of  the  Pentateuch  one  to 
another  appears  very  clearly  in  this  study  of  the 
KINDS  and  USES  of  laws  in  the  Pentateuch,  as  clear- 
ly as  the  relation  of  the  heavenly  bodies  one  to  an- 
other is  shown  in  the  facts  of  astronomy.  Perceiving 
these  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws,  it  is  an  easy  matter 

260 


NINTH    INVESTIGATION  261 

to  observe  the  facts  of  their  relationship.  How  they 
came  to  be  so  related  is  quite  another  matter;  this  is 
the  question  of  the  composition  of  the  Pentateuch,  not 
merely  the  question  of  time  and  place  and  author  of 
the  Pentateuch,  but  the  problem  of  accounting  for  the 
form  in  which  we  find  the  Pentateuch.  How  did  these 
various  parts  of  the  Pentateuch  come  to  be  related  to 
each  other  as  they  are,  the  Judgments  and  Statutes 
being  broken  up  into  groups,  and,  together  with  the 
Commandments,  completely  intermingled,  and  at  the 
same  time  interspersed  throughout  a  narrative,  which 
taken  by  itself,  omitting  the  laws  entirely,  makes  a 
continuous  story? 

I.  The  solution  of  this  problem  offered  by  the  Doc- 
umentary Theory  is  based  upon  the  theory  of  various 
authorship  for  the  different  parts  of  the  Pentateuch, 
at  widely  separated  times,  and  in  places  far  distant 
from  each  other.  This  solution  is  presented  with  great 
fullness  by  the  advocates  of  the  Documentary  Theory 
in  their  writings,  to  which  the  reader  is  referred  (Cf. 
Welhausen,  Composition  des  Hexateuchs;  The  Oxford 
Hexateuch;  Simpson,  Pentateuchal  Criticism) .  Only 
a  brief  statement  for  readers  who  have  but  little 
knowledge  of  the  subject  will  be  presented  here. 

(1)  According  to  the  Documentary  Theory  there 
existed  among  the  Jews  in  the  time  of  the  exile  in 
Babylon,  or  as  some  contend,  at  even  a  later  date,  and 
as  still  others  think,  at  possibly  only  an  earlier  date, 
three  religious  documents.  One  of  these,  called  now 
by  critics  the  JE  document,  was  made  up  of  parts  of 
two  earlier  documents.  One  of  these  earlier  documents 
has  been  named  the  J  document,  because  of  the  pre- 
vailing use,  by  its  author,  of  the  name  Jehovah.  The 
other  of  these  earlier  documents  is  called  the  E  docu- 


262  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

ment,  because  of  the  prevailing  use,  by  its  author,  of 
the  name  Elohim  for  God.  These  two  documents,  in 
their  combined  form  of  JE,  contained  laws  pertaining 
to  civil  and  criminal  matters,  together  with  some  nar- 
rative. Another  document  was  called  the  P  document, 
relating  as  it  does  entirely  to  ritual  and  ecclesiastical 
matters ;  it  is  claimed  to  have  been  the  work  of  a  priest 
or  of  priests  and  so  has  been  called  the  P  document. 
The  laws  of  this  document  were  thus  entirely  different 
in  character  from  the  laws  contained  in  the  JE  docu- 
ment. The  laws  in  the  P  document  were,  also,  com- 
bined with  narrative. 

(2).  These  two  documents,  the  JE  document  and 
the  P  document,  were,  according  to  the  theory,  taken 
in  hand  by  a  redactor  or  redactors  who  combined  them 
into  one  continuous  work  in  four  successive  parts  now 
known  as  Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus  and  Numbers, 
having  throughout  a  running  narrative  from  begin- 
ning to  end  of  the  combined  documents.  It  is  not 
claimed  that  the  redactor  or  redactors  used  all  of  the 
laws  of  the  JE  document  or  of  the  P  document  and 
especially  not  all  of  the  narrative  found  in  either  of 
these  documents.  Indeed,  it  is  generally  admitted  that 
they  did  not  use  all  of  either  document.  But  it  is 
claimed  that  the  process  of  redaction,  also  introduced 
some  narrative,  especially  connecting  material.  It,  also, 
necessarily  appears  in  this  process  of  redaction  (though 
it  is  seldom  mentioned)  that  the  redactors  broke  up 
both  of  the  documents  before  them  and  the  different 
and  very  distinct  law-codes  contained  in  them,  that  in 
JE  concerning  civil  and  criminal  matters  and  that  in  P 
concerning  ritual  and  ecclesiastical  matters,  together 
with  a  long  description  of  the  Tabernacle,  and  in- 


NINTH   INVESTIGATION  263 

serted  these  fragments  in  larger  or  smaller  pieces  in 
the  mingled  and  indiscriminate  order  in  which  they 
are  now  found  in  the  books  in  the  Pentateuch,  narra- 
tive in  Genesis,  and  narrative  and  laws  in  Exodus, 
Leviticus  and  Numbers.  The  fact  that  there  resulted 
from  this  method  numerous  repetitions  was,  also,  it 
is  claimed  disregarded  by  the  redactors. 

In  addition  to  these  two  documents,  JE  and  P  thus 
made  into  one  continuous  series  of  books  of  the  Penta- 
teuch by  the  redactor  or  redactors,  there  is  recognized 
a  third  document,  D,  so-called  from  the  name  Deuter- 
onomy, or  second  statement  of  the  Law,  which  so  well 
befits  this  book.  According  to  the  Documentary  The- 
ory, D  made  use  of  materials  found  largely  in  JE  and 
so  mainly  contains  laws  pertaining  to  things  civil  and 
criminal.  Yet,  strange  to  say,  Deuteronomy  contains 
many  laws  of  a  ritual  character,  especially  those  per- 
taining to  the  national  life,  as  laws  of  clean  and  un- 
clean things  and  of  feasts,  but  omits,  for  the  most  part, 
the  ritual  laws  of  worship  contained  in  Leviticus,  and 
so  said  to  belong  to  P.  Advocates  of  the  Documentary 
Theory  admit,  of  course,  the  existence  in  D  of  these 
ritual  laws  pertaining  to  national  life,  but  do  not  admit 
that  they  are  based  upon  any  knowledge  of  P  which 
is  claimed  to  be  of  much  later  composition.  These 
ritual  laws  in  D  are  said  to  have  no  other  source  than 
the  practices  among  the  people.  This  document  D, 
the  redactors  are  said  to  have  appended  to  their  com- 
posite work  bodily,  thus  completing  the  composition  of 
the  Pentateuch  in  its  present  form. 

That  the  present  form  of  the  law-books  could  have 
been  brought  about  in  this  way  is  possible.  Whether 
or  not  the  Pentateuch  was  actually  brought  into  its 
present  form  in  this  way  is  quite  another  question. 


264.  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

There  are  some  exceedingly  peculiar  features  in  this 
solution  of  the  problem  of  the  composition  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch. It  requires  us  to  believe  that  the  redactor 
had  before  him  two  very  distinct  and  distinctive  books 
each  containing  a  code  of  laws  quite  consistent  and 
complete  in  itself.  One  of  these  codes  contained  ritual 
and  ecclesiastical  Statutes  and  the  other  civil  and 
criminal  Judgments.  It  is  represented  that  the  redac- 
tor having  before  him  these  codes  separate  and  distinct, 
each  with  its  own  appropriate  narrative  setting,  cut 
up  both  codes  into  fragments,  some  large,  but  many 
small,  mixed  these  fragments  indiscriminately  to- 
gether, made  up  one  narrative  from  pieces  of  narra- 
tive taken  from  that  accompanying  each  code,  added 
some  connecting  phrases  of  his  own,  and  tacked  D  on 
to  the  end,  and  so  gave  us  the  Pentateuch  as  we  have 
it  now.  I  confess  I  have  never  known  any  book  to 
be  made  up  in  that  way,  except  by  a  child  with  scis- 
sors and  paste! 

It  is  claimed  by  the  advocates  of  this  Documentary 
Theory  that  the  Pentateuch  was  a  growth.  The  final 
work  of  the  redactor  who  put  together  these  various 
documents  into  the  present  form  of  the  Pentateuch  as 
claimed  in  the  Theory  is,  to  say  the  least,  a  very 
peculiar  example  of  growth.  Such  a  work  would  not 
be  a  growth  at  all,  but  a  dismemberment,  a  disloca- 
tion and  a  patchwork,  and  struck  off  at  one  time,  the 
time  of  the  redactor.  Is  that  a  growth?  Such  a  con- 
struction of  the  Pentateuch  may  be  physically  possible, 
but  is  it  morally  probable?  When  any  present-day 
author  begins  to  construct  law  books  in  that  fashion, 
we  may  expect  his  friends  to  employ  a  nurse  to  watch 
over  him. 


NINTH  INVESTIGATION  265 

II.  But  to  set  aside  one  solution  of  this  Pentateuchal 
problem  does  not  produce  another ;  this  problem  of  the 
strange  form  of  composition  of  the  Pentateuch  yet 
remains  unsolved. 

(1).  What  solution  is  possibly  provided  by  the 
facts  concerning  the  Pentateuch  which  have  been 
brought  to  light  by  these  investigations?  It  may  be 
shown  now  by  the  observing  of  some  facts. 

(a).  "The  Lord  spake  unto  Moses,  saying,  Speak 
unto  the  people,  saying,"  is  the  well-known  formula 
for  the  announcement  of  laws  throughout  these  law- 
books. Sometimes  the  formula  is  varied  by  the  men- 
tion of  particular  persons  to  whom  Moses  was  to 
speak  as  "Speak  unto  the  priests,  the  sons  of  Aaron" 
(Lev.  XXI  :1).  Sometimes  the  second  part  of  the  for- 
mula is  omitted  altogether  and  it  stands  more  simply 
thus:  "The  Lord  spake  unto  Moses."  Then  follows 
the  message  exactly  as  when  the  whole  formula  is 
used.  There  certainly  can  be  no  doubt  that  these 
messages  were  to  be  passed  on  to  the  people,  in  fact, 
they  have  been  passed  on,  as  were  those  with  the  full 
formula,  and  are  handed  down  to  us  with  the  others. 
But  the  frequent  use  of  the  full  formula  makes  it 
clear  that  the  method  of  divine  communication  in  the 
wilderness,  was  "The  Lord  spake  unto  Moses"  and 
"Moses  spake  unto  the  people";  that  is  to  say,  Moses 
was  first  of  all  a  speaking  prophet.  Reference  to  this 
fact  is  found  in  Lev.  VII  :38,  where  mention  is  made 
that  Moses  "commanded"  the  people  concerning  burnt 
offerings. 

(b).  In  Ex.  XVII  :14,  it  is  said,  "And  the  Lord  said 
unto  Moses,  Write  these  things  in  a  book."  Eight 
times  in  the  Pentateuch  writing  is  distinctly  mentioned 
or  distinctly  implied    (Bible  Teacher,  Biblical  Gains 


266  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

from  Egyptian  Exploration,  Nov.  1901).  Sometimes 
it  was  commanded  that  "These  things  be  written 
down."  Were  "these"  the  only  things  that  were  writ- 
ten down?  Whether  everything  that  was  given  Moses 
was  written  down  or  not,  it  is  plain  that  he  was  not 
only  first  of  all  a  speaking  prophet,  but  was  a  ivriting 
prophet,  also.  Whether  Moses  actually  did  the  writing 
with  his  own  hand,  or  had  the  writing  done  by  scribes, 
as  was  commonly  the  custom  in  Egypt,  and  as  is  fre- 
quently done  by  the  secretaries  of  literary  people  to- 
day, matters  not.  In  either  case  the  prophecy  was  a 
written  prophecy. 

(c)  When  we  examine  the  narrative  minutely,  an- 
other  fast  soon  emerges.  8here  occur  frequently  such 
expressions  as  "They  journeyed  from,"  "They  tarried 
here,"  "On  the  morrow."  With  great  frequency  such 
notice  of  passing  time,  and  the  relation  of  the  narra- 
tive to  passing  time,  occurs  in  these  books.  Plainly  the 
books  are  journalistic  in  form  (Cf.  Naville,  Schweich 
Lectures,  1915,  p.  44).  This  form  is  a  fact.  How 
came  these  books  to  be  in  this  form?  Were  they  writ- 
ten down  from  day  to  day,  or  from  time  to  time,  or 
were  they  cast  into  this  form  all  at  one  time  and  that 
a  later  time?  This  latter  view  might  properly  be  the 
subject  of  a  theory  to  be  sustained  by  argument,  as, 
indeed,  has  already  been  attempted,  but  it  does  not 
yet  appear  as  a  fact.  Let  us  enquire  how  the  former 
view  may  be  made  to  appear. 

(d)  Still  another  fact  comes  to  light  upon  carefully 
considering  the  first  two  of  the  facts  already  pre- 
sented; that  "Moses  spake  unto  the  people  saying," 
and  that  the  Lord  commanded  to  "write  these  things  in 
a  book."     "These  things"  to  be  written  were,  as  we 


NINTH   INVESTIGATION  267 

have  seen,  the  things  which  were  first  spoken  to  Moses 
and  then  spoken  by  Moses  to  the  people.  After  this 
Moses  wrote  the  same  things  in  a  book.  Thus  Moses 
was  first  a  speaking  prophet  and  only  secondarily  a 
writing  prophet.  The  fundamental  conception  of  a 
prophet  is  that  of  a  speaker  (Hebrew  nabi),  one  who 
spoke  for  God,  then  secondarily  proclaimed  the  divine 
message,  and  only  in  the  third  place  gave  prediction. 
The  same  idea  is  still  found  in  the  Greek  prophemi  and 
is  carried  over  into  the  English  and  turned  into  the 
well-known  formula  for  the  three-fold  idea  of  prophecy, 
"to  tell  for,  to  tell  forth,  and  to  foretell."  Thus  this 
general  character  of  prophecy  is  exactly  exemplified  in 
the  prophetic  work  of  Moses,  he  was  first  a  speaking 
prophet  who  spoke  forth,  and  then  afterwards  a  writ- 
ing prophet. 

These  four  facts,  that  "Moses  spake  to  the  people," 
that  he  "wrote  these  things  in  a  book,"  that  the  re- 
mains which  have  come  to  us  are  in  journalistic  form, 
and  that  Moses  was  first  a  speaking  prophet  and  only 
secondarily  a  writing  prophet,  put  clearly  before  us 
the  literary  method  followed  in  the  wilderness  sojourn, 
and  that  is  represented  by  the  Pentateuch  itself  as  it 
now  stands. 

Let  us  in  imagination  follow  with  the  people  on  this 
strange  journey,  and  observe  from  day  to  day  what 
takes  place.  The  cloud  has  lifted  from  the  Tabernacle, 
the  order  is  given  to  break  camp,  the  Tabernacle  is 
taken  down  to  be  carried  by  those  appointed  to  the 
service,  and  shortly  the  whole  company  of  those  about 
the  Tabernacle  at  the  central  place  of  encampment  is 
on  the  march.  Again  the  cloud  stops,  the  order  is 
given  to  pitch  camp,  the  Tabernacle  is  set  up,  and 
the  guards  from  each  tribe  take  their  places  in  order 


268  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATOUCH 

around  about  the  Tabernacle  at  this  new  camping 
ground.  The  narrator  records  these  events,  sometimes 
writing  down  the  place  of  encampment  and  sometimes 
not.  Then  Moses  speaks  unto  the  people  as  God  com- 
mands him  for  their  instruction.  Sometimes  he  speaks 
to  them  concerning  their  relations  "one  to  another" 
and  sometimes  concerning  the  method  of  worship  or 
of  some  new  and  higher  idea  of  citizenship  in  the  The- 
ocracy. What  Moses  spake  unto  the  people  is  recorded 
by  the  narrator.  From  time  to  time  Moses  again  in- 
structs the  people,  usually  adding  something  to  their 
laws,  and,  also,  frequently  dwelling  again  and  again 
upon  such  laws  as  they  had  need  continually  to  be 
reminded  of,  as  the  law  against  homicide,  against 
stealing,  the  Sabbath  laws,  and  the  laws  of  decency, 
with,  also,  frequent  reiteration  of  the  laws  of  unclean- 
ness  and  the  more  common  acts  of  worship.  All  the 
while  the  narrator  is  still  recording,  from  time  to  time 
as  they  are  given,  the  things  which  "Moses  spake  unto 
the  people." 

But  writing  material  was  not  abundant  in  the  wil- 
derness, whatever  method  of  writing  was  employed. 
Not  many  copies  of  the  record  could  be  made.  Be- 
sides, only  a  certain  educated  class  could  read,  even  if 
books  were  obtainable.  The  record  of  these  things 
spoken  by  Moses  thus  could  not  be  in  the  hands  of  all 
the  people,  and  thus  the  necessity  for  reiteration  of 
most  necessary  teachings  would  arise.  Moreover  the 
shepherds  away  with  the  flocks,  who  from  time  to  time 
might  come  to  the  feasts,  would  make  additional  occa- 
sion for  the  reiteration  of  some  things  which  "Moses 
spake  unto  the  people." 

Then  from  time  to  time  remarkable  things  were 


NINTH   INVESTIGATION  269 

happening.  There  were  rebellions,  as  that  of  Koran, 
Dathan  and  Abiram ;  disloyalty  was  displayed,  as  that 
of  Aaron  and  Miriam;  the  people  murmured,  as  at 
Kadesh  Barnea  and  at  Merebah ;  or  some  one  appeared 
with  a  case  for  which  no  law  was  yet  provided,  as  the 
case  of  Zelophehad's  daughters.  All  these  things  the 
narrator  put  down  in  the  record  in  journalistic  order. 
Sometimes  the  event  gave  rise  immediately  to  a  special 
law,  as  in  the  case  of  Zelophehad's  daughters,  and  this 
law  with  other  kindred  instructions,  was  also  put  down 
in  the  appropriate  place  in  order  in  the  record.  Thus 
the  literary  method  as  plainly  outlined  for  us  in  the 
facts  of  the  Pentateuch  would  produce  just  such  a  pecu- 
liar record  as  we  have,  a  narrative  interspersed  with 
brief  groups  of  laws  of  various  kinds  with  many  repeti- 
tions of  the  kinds  of  laws  most  needing  "precept  upon 
precept,"  sometimes  making  evident  the  particular 
event  out  of  which  the  teaching  arose,  but  oftener  not 
giving  any  indication  of  its  immediate  relevancy. 
What  teacher  ever  is  wholly  dependent  upon  current 
events  for  the  suggestion  of  each  successive  lesson,  and 
what  teacher  is  wholly  free  from  such  suggestion  ? 

(2)  So  far  facts.  Perhaps,  in  strict  adherance  to 
logical  methods ;  to  advance  now  to  the  claim  that  this 
is  a  solution  of  the  problem  of  the  composition  of  the 
Pentateuch,  that  the  books  of  the  Law  were  actually 
produced  in  this  way,  would  not  be  a  fact,  but  a  theory. 
So  be  it:  it  is  a  theory  that  rests  immediately  upon 
facts  and  is  in  exact  accord  with  them,  adds  no  suppo- 
sitional element  to  them,  and  puts  before  us  a  simple, 
natural  and  reasonable  account  of  the  otherwise  incom- 
prehensible intermingling  of  laws  interspersed  with 
narrative  which  is  found  in  these  law  books.  This  I 
believe  to  have  been  the  method  of  the  composition  of 


270  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

the  three  books,  Exodus,  Leviticus  and  Numbers.  Gen- 
esis is  not  in  the  journalistic  form.  Deuteronomy  dis- 
plays a  method  which  is  practically  the  same.  But  the 
time  covered  by  its  composition  is  so  short  that  it  seems 
almost  as  if  struck  off  at  one  time.  Yet  even  in  Deu- 
teronomy the  addresses  succeed  each  other  in  regular 
order,  doubtless  as  they  were  delivered.  This  view 
of  the  composition  of  the  Pentateuch  may  not  reflect 
so  much  credit  upon  the  ingenuity  required  for  its 
discovery,  but  I  venture  to  think  that  it  is  more  in 
accord  with  the  facts  of  the  Pentateuch  itself. 


Chapter  X 

TENTH  INVESTIGATION 

Examination    into   the   Validity   of   Objections 

Urged  Against  this  Solution  of  the 

Pentateuchal  Problem 

The  principal  purpose  of  the  publication  of  this  so- 
lution of  the  Pentateuchal  Problem  has  been  accom- 
plished in  the  presentation  of  the  constructive  mate- 
rials, in  the  examination  of  the  corroborative  evidence 
from  archaeology,  and  in  the  consideration  of  histori- 
cal difficulties  which  arise.  It  is  on  the  consideration 
of  these  materials  and  their  archaeological  and  histori- 
cal bearings  that  the  solution  will  meet  approval  or  dis- 
approval. But  whether  one  approve  or  disapprove, 
objections  are  certain  to  arise,  and,  in  some  cases,  to 
merit  serious  consideration. 

I.  It  is  not,  indeed,  incumbent  upon  a  solution  of  the 
general  problem  of  the  Pentateuch  that  it,  also,  solve 
all  the  isolated  separate  problems  in  the  Pentateuch 
or  meet  all  the  objections  that  may  be  urged  against 
some  subordinate  points  of  the  application  of  the 
general  solution.  The  horizon  of  human  knowledge 
is  always  jagged  and  the  way  in  which  the  known  fits 
into  the  unknown  is  always  rather  uncertain ;  so  that  it 
will  always  be  possible,  when  a  general  solution  is 
found,  to  assail,  with  petty  objections,  some  outlying 
corner.    Such  objections  may  safely  be  allowed  to  pass 

271 


272  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

unnoticed.  Serious  objections,  however,  that  are 
urged  against  the  materials  or  the  method  of  the  solu- 
tion must  receive  attention:  such  obiectM  ns  to  this 
solution  of  the  Pentateuchal  Problem  will  be  considered 
in  this  closing  chapter. 

Further  consideration  of  the  general  principle  of 
dealing  with  objections  which  has  just  been  enun- 
ciated may  well  be  given  before  the  objections  to  this 
solution  of  the  Pentateuchal  Problem  are  taken  up  in 
detail.  An  illustration  in  point  may  be  cited  from 
objections  already  urged  against  the  main  thesis  in 
this  solution  of  the  Pentateuchal  Problem.  A  dis- 
tinguished modern  scholar  and,  indeed,  personal  friend 
of  the  author.  Professor  George  A.  Barton,  in  review- 
ing this  solution  of  the  Pentateuchal  Problem  as  it 
appeared  in  the  Journal  of  the  Society  of  Biblical  Lit- 
erature and  Exegesis,  said  that  the  solution  was  plausi- 
ble, but  that,  as  it  did  not  meet  the  various  difficulties 
of  the  Pentateuch  in  detail,  did  not  go  to  the  root  of 
the  matter  and  so  was  not  a  "solution  of  the  Penta- 
teuchal Problem."  It  is  not  necessary  that  a  solution 
of  the  Pentateuchal  Problem  should  meet  every  diffi- 
culty to  be  found  in  the  Pentateuch.  No  proposed  so- 
lution of  the  Pentateuchal  Problem  ever  has  furnished 
in  itself  satisfactory  explanations  of  all  the  discrepan- 
cies and  peculiarities  and  historical  difficulties 
to  be  found  in  the  Pentateuchal  books,  or  met 
all  the  objections  urged  against  it.  Certainly  the 
Documentary  Theory  does  not  do  so.  The  theory  of 
four  or  more  documents  does  not  of  itself  explain  the 
discrepancies  in  numbers,  nor  the  strange  spelling  of 
proper  names  which  bear  so  many  indications  of  the 
influence  of  a  syllabic  form  of  writing,  nor  the  pres- 


TENTH   INVESTIGATION  273 

ence  of  so  many  Egyptian  words  in  the  Pentateuch, 
nor  the  absence  from  it  of  any  explicit  doctrine  of 
the  Resurrection,  nor  of  the  presence  of  Egyptian 
names  in  the  early  parts  of  the  genealogical  lists  and 
their  disappearance  at  later  times,  nor  the  peculiar 
and,  at  times,  incomprehensible  chronology  of  the 
Pentateuch,  especially  when  considered  in  connection 
with  the  times  of  the  Judges.  All  these  difficulties 
have  to  be  met  by  explanations  aside  from  the  elements 
of  the  Documentary  Theory.  It  is  nothing  against 
the  Documentary  Theory  that  it  is  so.  It  is  only  re- 
quired of  it,  or  of  any  other  theory  or  solution  of  any 
problem,  that  it  deal  effectively  with  the  problem  for 
which  it  is  proposed. 

So  with  this  proposed  solution  of  the  Pentateuchal 
Problem,  it  is  only  required  of  it  that  it  deal  effectively 
with  the  main  problem  for  which  it  is  proposed.  But 
it  is,  also,  important  to  see,  if  the  solution  of  the  main 
problem  does  actually  solve,  also,  minor  difficulties. 

Any  consideration  of  objections  against  a  solution  of 
the  Pentateuchal  Problem  because  of  difficulties  that 
do  not  seem  to  be  met  by  it  must  take  into  the  account, 
also,  that  an  oriental  literary  production  is  not  to  be 
"explained"  and  "amended"  until  it  is  made  to  read 
like  an  occidental  book.  It  was  never  intended  to  be 
in  such  literary  form.  The  one  test  by  which  the 
skilled  archaeologist  instantly  rejects  as  a  forgery  a 
so-called  "find"  is  that  it  reads  exactly  like  a  modem 
occidental  piece  of  literature.  The  criticism  that 
gives  a  thoroughly  modem  form  to  disputed  portions 
of  the  Pentateuch  or  Isaiah  is,  to  the  archaeologist, 
farthest  from  being  correct.  When  will  criticism  ever 
be  practical  enough  in  present  day  affairs  to  ponder 
Kipling's  already  quoted  line  "East  is  east  and  west  is 


274  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

west."  The  oriental  writer  ceased  his  labors  at  exactly 
the  point  at  which  the  occidental  writer  begins  his 
final  preparation  to  put  a  book  in  order  for  the  pub- 
lisher; paragraphing,  removing  all  repetitions,  clear- 
ing away  of  all  discrepancies,  punctuation  and  finally 
pagination.  All  such  work  was  omitted  by  the  ancient 
oriental  writer.  It  is  not  required  of  any  one  now  to 
supply  these  things  nor  to  alter  all  or  any  of  the  pecu- 
liarities that  result  from  the  lack  of  them. 

Furthermore,  repetitions,  and  discrepancies  in  these 
repetitions,  are  characteristic  of  literature  of  the  time 
and  place  from  which  the  ancient  Pentateuchal  docu- 
ments came.  Writing,  as  we  have  already  seen,  (p.  243- 
44)  and  need  now  distinctly  recall,  was  either  upon  tab- 
lets of  clay,  or  upon  rolls  of  papyrus  and  later  of  parch- 
ment. Verbal  quotation  or  cross-references  are  almost 
impossible  under  such  circumstances.  Books  were  not 
made  in  editions.  Whether  made  in  clay  tablets  or  on 
rolls  of  papyrus,  each  such  book  was  a  separate  indiv- 
idual edition.  Reference  to  any  particular  place  to  find 
any  statement  would  not  hold  good  for  any  other  copy 
of  the  same  book.  Both  tablets  and  rolls  were  of  ir- 
regular size  and  devoid  of  uniform  lines  and  spaces. 
To  go  away  to  find  the  particular  tablet  or  to  turn 
to  the  place  in  a  roll,  perhaps  twenty,  or  even  fifty, 
feet  distant  from  the  place  where  one  is  reading,  is  not 
easy.  From  these  conditions  two  results  came;  when 
a  writer  wished  to  refer  to  a  statement  already  made, 
it  was  easier  to  repeat  it  than  to  cite  it  by  any  kind 
of  intelligible  reference.  Then,  as  the  writer  did  not 
turn  to  the  place  to  quote  the  statement,  naturally  he 
quoted  it  from  memory  and  so  gave  ofttimes  a  repe- 
tition of  the  thought  rather  than  an  exact  reproduction 


TENTH   INVESTIGATION  275 

of  the  words.  An  explanation  was,  also,  sometimes 
given  of  his  own  words  and,  as  there  were  no  quotation 
marks  used,  his  explanation  was  not  separated  from 
his  quotation,  but  became  a  part  of  it. 

Such  vv^as  the  method  of  quoting  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment and  even  in  the  days  of  our  Lord  and  the  evan- 
gelists in  the  New  Testament.  Why  should  not  then 
Moses,  still  the  Law^-giver,  in  his  public  addresses  in 
Deuteronomy  make  such  explanations  and  additions  of 
explanatory  phrases  as  the  circumstances  made  neces- 
sary. Thus  it  is  to  be  expected  that  the  lack  of  the 
modern  final  preparation  for  publication  would  lead  to 
fragmentariness  and  repetitiousness.  Altogether  an 
oriental  book  is  certain  to  have  in  it  many  things 
puzzling  to  western  people  and  some  for  which  no 
explanation  can  be  given. 

II.  Having  thus  seen  the  limitations  to  the  right  of 
objections  to  demand  a  hearing  in  this  particular  case, 
objections  that  have  an  inherent  right  to  be  heard 
may  now  be  considered. 

(1)  The  most  natural  and  fundamental  objection  that 
arises  is  that  this  solution  of  the  Pentateuchal  Problem, 
based  upon  the  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws,  rests  en- 
tirely upon  the  legal  portions  of  the  Law  books.  Such 
an  objection  is  plausible.  Indeed,  it  obtrudes  itself, 
yet  it  is  exceedingly  specious;  one  easily  deceives 
himself  by  it.  It  would  be  more  correct  to  say  that  the 
criteria  of  this  solution  of  the  Pentateuchal  Problem 
are  found  in  the  legal  portions  of  the  Law  books ;  the 
application  of  these  criteria,  however,  extends  to  the 
narrative  portions  as  well ;  for  it  is  the  narrative  por- 
tions that  make  the  legal  portions  intelligible.  The 
laws  alone,  would,  for  the  most  part,  mean  nothing 
for  the  history  of  religion  in  the  world  without  the 


276  THE    PROBLEM    OF   THE    PENTATEUCH 

setting  which  the  historical  narrative  gives.  Imagine, 
if  you  can,  the  existence  of  these  laws  without  a  word 
concerning  where  they  were  given,  by  whom  given,  to 
whom  given,  or  under  what  circumstances  given. 
They  would  constitute  the  great  legal  and  historical 
mystery  concerning  which  scholars  would  wrangle  for 
centuries  about  their  proper  assignment  in  the  history 
of  nations.  It  is  the  narrative  portions  of  the  Law 
books  that  save  us  from  such  a  calamity.  As  the  his- 
torical material  is  thus  necessary  to  the  intelligibility 
of  the  Law  portions  of  these  books,  so  almost  each 
narrative  portion,  by  reason  of  the  historical  setting 
which  it  is  suited  to  give  to  some  portion  of  the  laws, 
suggests  naturally,  sometimes  with  absolute  certainty, 
its  own  assignment  among  the  divisions  indicated  by 
the  technical  legal  terms.  Only  in  a  few  instances  is 
there  real  difficulty  in  determining  to  which  group  of 
laws  a  piece  of  intervening  narrative  belongs. 

(2)  Another  objection  at  once  appears  at  this 
point;  that  the  assignment  of  such  large  portions  of 
these  law  books  as  are  occupied  by  the  narrative  por- 
tions will  present  so  many,  and  such  great,  difficulties 
that  the  reliability  of  the  divisions  will  be  impaired. 

It  is  only  necessary  to  go  over  the  assignment  of 
the  narrative  portions  in  detail  to  discern  that  this 
objection  is  only  apparent;  it  is  not  in  any  instance 
real.  There  is  no  question  of  the  assignment  of  narra- 
tive in  Leviticus,  and  none  in  Deuteronomy.  There  is 
no  problem  at  all  in  Exodus,  after  the  twentieth  chap- 
ter. The  first  nineteen  chapters  are  necessarily  an 
introduction  to  all  the  ''Commandments,"  the  "Judg- 
ments" and  the  "Statutes"  which  follow.  It  is  so  rec- 
ognized in  the  assignment  of  this  narrative  portion 


TENTH  INVESTIGATION  277 

(Cf.  Diagram,  p.  212).  It  might  be  an  introduction 
to  either  the  "Judgments"  or  the  "Statutes,"  in  fact, 
is  an  introduction  to  both,  and  so,  in  the  comparison 
with  the  Documentary  Theory  (Cf.  Diagram,  p.  212), 
this  portion  is  classified  as  "Divided  agreement." 
There  remains  only  the  book  of  Numbers  in  which  this 
problem  of  the  assignment  of  narrative  portions  seems 
at  first  to  present  real  difficulties.  When  these  narra- 
tive portions  are  examined  in  detail,  the  apparent  diffi- 
culty disappears  little  by  little  until  there  is  but  a 
modicum  left.  It  is  interesting  to  note,  also,  that  the 
little  that  remains  is  quite  identical  with  the  portions 
that  afford  most  of  the  difficulty  and  uncertainty  en- 
countered by  the  Documentary  Theory  in  this  same 
book  of  Numbers.  It  is,  in  either  case,  the  difficulty 
of  historical  vagueness  occasioned  by  the  journalistic 
form  of  the  narrative  and  the  isolated  character  of  the 
various  episodes  narrated. 

(3)  Another  query  may  be  raised  at  this  point:  As 
the  divisions  of  the  Pentateuch  indicated  by  the 
KINDS  and  USES  of  laws  are  the  same  as  the  divi- 
sions marked  out  by  the  Documentary  Theory,  it  fol- 
lows that  there  is  the  same  distinctive  use  of  the  divine 
names  in  these  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws  as  in  the 
different  documents  of  the  Documentary  Theory.  Ho-w 
account  for  such  discriminative  use  of  the  divine 
names  in  the  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws? 

Elohim,  the  general  name  for  God  which  is  found 
almost  exclusively  in  the  "judgments,"  the  civil  and 
criminal  laws,  was  the  appropriate  divine  name  for 
God  in  the  legal  world  of  Semitic  people  then,  as  God 
IS  in  our  legal  world  of  today.  It  is  seldom  that  any 
other  name  for  the  divine  being  is  used  in  our  courts 
and  in  our  laws  today.     On  the  other  hand  Jehovah, 


278  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

the  covenant  name  of  God,  was  the  appropriate  name 
in  the  ecclesiastical  writings  especially  the  whole  Le- 
vitical  system,  as  the  word  Saviour,  Christ,  the  Lord, 
and  Jesus,  and  very  many  other  gracious  names  of 
God  are  so  frequently  used,  at  the  present  time,  for 
the  like  purpose  in  religious  courts  and  gatherings.  A 
visit  to  a  religious  meeting  and  to  a  court  of  law  today 
among  Christian  people  will  reveal  exactly  the  same 
discriminating  use  of  the  divine  names  as  is  to  be 
seen  in  the  various  divisions  of  the  Pentateuchal  laws 
and  associated  narrative.  But  there  were  occasions 
then,  as  there  are  occasions  now,  when  such  discrimina- 
tion in  the  use  of  divine  names  was  not  necessary,  and, 
accordingly,  textual  criticism  has  shown  that  the  divine 
names  were  used  interchangeably  and  the  Literary 
criticism  admits  that  this  is  occasionally  true.  Indeed, 
all  advocates  of  the  Documentary  Theory  admit  some 
exceptions  to  the  general  rule  in  the  use  of  the  divine 
names  in  the  various  supposed  documents. 

(4)  Something  must  be  said,  also,  concerning  the 
omission  of  Genesis  from  the  diagram  of  comparison, 
though  it  is  later  considered  in  the  investigations. 
That  Genesis  should  be  omitted  from  the  first  part  of 
the  investigation  is  natural  enough,  since  the  investi- 
gation began  concerning  the  "materials  of  the  Law." 
But  it  will  be  asked.  How  can  the  problem  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch be  said  to  be  solved  by  any  explanation  that 
does  not  make  any  mention  of  Genesis? 

It  may  be  noted  that  the  original  analysis  of  the 
Pentateuch  according  to  the  Documentary  Theory 
arose  first  in  Genesis  from  the  use  of  the  divine  names 
in  that  book,  though  strange  to  say,  advocates  of  the 
Documentary  Theory,  have,  of  late,  evinced  great  ner- 


TENTH  INVESTIGATION  279 

vousness  at  the  mention  of  this  primal  criterion  of 
partition.  A  perfectly  natural  and  simple  explanation 
of  the  discriminating  use  of  these  divine  names  in  the 
law  books,  which  has  just  been  considered  in  this  dis- 
cussion, prepares  the  way,  also,  for  the  solution  of  the 
problem  of  the  use  of  the  divine  names  in  Genesis. 
The  two  names  being  in  existence  and  having  such 
markedly  distinctive  use,  the  discriminating  use  of 
these  names  in  Genesis  offers  no  real  difficulty.  Why 
should  not  Elohiyn,  God,  appear  in  the  creation  Chap- 
ter, and  Jehovah,  the  name  of  the  covenant  God,  ap- 
pear in  the  chapter  of  the  Fall  and  the  announcement 
of  the  Prot-evangelium  ?  And  why  should  not  these 
names  sometimes  be  used  in  Genesis,  as  elsewhere, 
without  discrimination  between  them?  That  they 
can,  in  almost  every  instance,  be  so  explained,  and 
reasonably,  in  Genesis,  has  been  shown  many  times 
(Cf.  Green,  Unity  of  Genesis).  That  in  some  cases 
either  divine  name  would  suffice,  and  so  variations 
occur,  is  certain. 

When  once  the  Documentary  analysis  has  been  ex- 
tended to  the  law-books  and  a  large  number  of  peculiar 
words  and  phrases  noted  in  the  various  divisions,  these, 
as  criteria,  were  applied  to  Genesis  as  well,  and  so  the 
book  was  divided  not  only  into  J  and  E  sections  on 
the  criterion  of  the  divine  names,  but  portions  were 
assigned  to  P,  also.  Now  "one  of  the  chief  of  these 
criteria  of  the  P  Document"  (to  quote  Kautzsch,  Lit- 
erature of  the  Old  Testament,  p.  109),  "is  the  style, 
with  its  unfailing  breadth,  its  fondness  for  details." 
This  very  exactly  corresponds  to  the  descriptive  style 
of  the  "statutes"  which  Kautzsch  (p.  109)  calls  "far 
the  weightiest  portion  of  the  Priest  Writing."  Thus 
Genesis,  which  so  often  calls  for  descriptive  writing, 


280  THE   PROBLEM    OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 

naturally  reveals  much  of  the  distinctive  style  of  that 
Pentateuchal  author,  whom  the  Documentary  Theory 
calls  P  and  limits  to  a  portion  of  the  Pentateuch,  but 
which  is,  as  we  have  seen,  in  reality,  the  real  author 
of  the  Pentateuch.  The  portions  which  do  not  call 
for  a  descriptive  style  are  naturally  less  descriptive  in 
style,  and  those  portions  the  Documentary  Theory  as- 
signs to  J  and  E.  How  delightfully  simple.  But  how 
much  more  natural  that  the  style  should  be,  as  it  is, 
adapted  to  the  matter  in  hand,  and  so  descriptive  in 
descriptive  matter  and  less  so  elsewhere.  And  how 
naturally  simple  and  simply  natural  this  is! 

(5)  To  all  the  facts  developed  by  these  investiga- 
tions and  enforced  by  these  arguments  it  may  perhaps 
be  objected:  These  facts  are  but  collateral  facts  of 
the  Documentary  Theory,  additional  "marks,"  a  part 
of  the  criteria  of  the  various  authors :  J  and  E  were 
legal  writers  and  P  was  an  ecclesiastical  writer. 

This  objection,  is,  on  the  face  of  it,  exceedingly 
plausible.  Perhaps,  to  many  who  hold  the  Documen- 
tary Theory,  the  mere  statement  of  this  objection  will 
come  as  an  instant  relief  from  all  the  spectral  doubts 
about  the  safety  of  the  Theory  which  the  presentation 
of  the  facts  developed  by  these  investigations  has 
aroused.  Such  will  be  little  disposed  to  give  the  subject 
further  consideration.  It  is  useless  to  write  anything 
for  those  who  do  only  such  superficial  thinking,  and 
who  do  not  look  a  second  time  and  very  sharply,  into 
the  face  of  every  view  that  presents  itself  for  consid- 
eration. For  those  who  wish  to  know  unerringly  the 
truth,  there  are  several  things  to  be  said. 

The  answer  to  this  objection  is  found  in  a  careful 
consideration  of  the  facts  already  presented. 


TENTH   INVESTIGATION  281 

(a)  To  those  who  so  devoutly  admire  the  Docu- 
mentary Theory  it  may  not  seem  very  reverent  toward 
their  beloved  view  to  ask  why  any  one,  as  the  final 
redactor,  who  had  in  his  possession  the  JE  Document 
presenting  a  consistent  compendium  of  laws  civil  and 
criminal,  and  the  P  Document  equally  consistent  as 
ritual  law,  should  have  yielded  to  such  a  crazy  impulse 
as  that  to  break  them  into  fragments,  large  and  small, 
mingle  the  fragments  and  distribute  them  throughout 
various  books  with  the  narrative  portions  of  both 
documents  inserted  between  these  various  fragments  of 
law;  but  I  cannot  resist  the  temptation  to  ask  this 
question.  Instead  of  such  a  ridiculous  result  from  con- 
sidering these  facts  concerning  laws  as  but  collateral 
facts  of  the  Documentary  Theory,  the  fragmentary 
groups  of  laws  in  the  books  of  Exodus,  Leviticus  and 
Numbers  can  be  reasonably  accounted  for  only  on  the 
plain  representation  which  they  put  forth,  that  those 
groups  of  laws  grew  out  of  progressing  events  or  were 
suggested  by  them. 

(b)  The  complete  practical  consideration  of  this 
objection  is  a  careful  study  of  all  the  facts  developed 
by  the  preceding  investigations.  Those  facts,  when 
fully  apprehended  and  appreciated,  so  satisfactorily 
account  for  the  peculiarities  of  style  and  vocabulary 
in  the  Pentateuch,  and  are  so  helpful  in  the  considera- 
tion of  historical  difficulties,  (aside,  of  course,  from 
those  historical  difficulties  which  only  arise  on  the 
supposition  that  the  Documentary  Theory  is  correct) , 
that  they  will  not  permit  any  one  to  admit  any  theo- 
retical exvlanation.  Why  theorize  for  an  explanation 
when  the  known  facts  furnish  a  completely  satisfactory 
one?  Common-sense  does  not  admit  suppositions  that 
are  not  needed.    The  law  of  economy  is  an  inexorable 


282  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

law  in  logic,  especially  that  empiric  logic  which  is  a 
dominant  element  in  every  sane  mind.  Had  these 
facts  concerning  the  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws  been 
carefully  noted  before  the  supposition  of  unknown 
authors  and  unmentioned  documents  was  put  forth, 
probably  no  one  would  ever  have  had  the  temerity  to  ad- 
vance so  gratuitous  a  supposition;  certainly  common- 
sense,  so  inimical  to  suppositions  that  are  not  needed, 
would  never  have  permitted  many  to  be  attracted  by 
such  a  theory,  plausible  as  that  theory  has  seemed  to 
many  to  be  at  a  time  when  the  facts  about  KINDS  and 
USES  of  laws  had  not  been  brought  to  their  attention. 

(c)  The  first  two  answers  to  this  objection  are 
quite  sufficient,  but  there  is  another  that  renders  them 
quite  unnecessary.  In  reality,  answer  to  this  objection 
is  like  the  answer  of  the  attorney  who  was  called  upon 
to  account  for  the  absence  of  some  one  for  whose  pres- 
ence in  court  he  was  responsible.  After  citing  a 
number  of  reasons,  any  one  of  which  might  have  ex- 
cused the  man,  the  attorney  concluded  by  saying,  "Last 
of  all,  your  Honor,  my  client  is  not  here  because  he  is 
dead!"  Several  answers  may  be  given  to  this  objec- 
tion, each  one  weighty  enough  in  itself,  but  there  re- 
mains one  which  renders  all  the  others  unnecessary. 

This  distinction  in  technical  terms  runs  all  through 
the  Pentateuch  from  the  first  giving  of  laws  to  the 
end.  It  is  fully  observed  in  Deuteronomy.  This  is  per- 
fectly in  order  and  quite  to  be  expected,  if  this  dis- 
tinction and  the  consequent  divisions  of  the  Pentateuch 
were  really  produced  by  the  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws 
according  to  the  facts  which  have  been  pointed  out  in 
these  investigations,  but  perfectly  inexplicable  on  the 
supposition  that  various  authors  produced  the  Penta- 


TENTH  INVESTIGATION  283 

teuch  according  to  the  Documentary  Theory,  with  only 
the  collateral  facts  that  J  and  E  were  legal  writers  and 
P  a  ritualistic  and  ecclesiastical  writer.  How  would 
the  Deuteronomist,  on  that  theory,  have  observed  this 
distinction  in  technical  terms?  Did  some  priest  or 
prophet  of  the  time  of  Josiah  or  a  little  before  that 
time,  copy  this  distinction  from  JE  already  in  exist- 
ence? But  JE  existing  alone  would  not  show  such  dis- 
tinction at  all  between  "Judgments"  and  "Statutes." 
There  can  be  no  distinction  without  comparison  and 
there  was  no  comparison,  for  JE,  according  to  the 
divisions  made  by  the  Documentary  Theory  has  only 
"Judgments."  The  P  Document  with  its  "Statutes," 
according  to  the  Documentary  Theory,  had  not  yet 
been  written,  for  according  to  that  Theory,  it  was 
post-exilic.  So  this  witness  for  the  technical  law  terms 
as  collateral  facts  of  the  Documentary  Theory, 
needed  in  court  to  testify  for  the  Deuteronomist  on 
behalf  of  that  Theory,  if  he  was  not  dead,  at  least 
had  not  yet  begun  to  live. 

No,  the  facts  noted  in  these  investigations,  are  not 
merely  collateral  facts  of  the  Documentary  Theory: 
facts  they  certainly  are,  facts  that  must  be  taken  into 
the  account  by  any  adequate  theory  concerning  the 
Pentateuch,  but  they  are  not  "collateral"  with  the 
other  portions  of  the  Documentary  Theory,  not  by  the 
at  least  two  whole  centuries  that  elapsed  between  the 
time  of  Josiah  and  the  work  of  the  final  redactor,  who, 
according  to  the  Documentary  Theory  used  scissors 
and  paste  to  make  the  present  books  of  the  Pentateuch 
out  of  JE  and  P,  with  D  pasted  on  to  the  end. 

It  is  the  Pentateuch  that  now  is  that  must  be  ac- 
counted for.     The  final  redactor  is  the  real  man  of 


284  THE    PROBLEM    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

mystery  of  the  Documentary  Theory.  On  the  other 
hand,  consideration  of  the  KINDS  and  USES  of  laws 
makes  the  Pentateuch,  as  it  now  is,  not  only  explicable, 
but  perfectly  simple  and  natural,  a  journalistic  record 
of  laws  forty  years  in  the  making  and  of  history  forty 
years  in  the  writing. 

CONCLUSION 

These  varied  investigations  and  the  striking  compari- 
son v/ith  the  Documentary  Theory  which  they  provide 
tend  to  establish  the  trustworthiness  of  the  Penta- 
teuchal  records  at  their  face  value.  They  are  not  to  be 
broken  up  into  fragments,  as  from  different  authors 
at  widely  separated  dates,  and  so  made  to  present  to 
us  an  entirely  reconstructed  national  and  ecclesiastical 
history  of  Israel,  but  are  to  be  read  as  they  stand,  and 
their  peculiarities  of  style  and  vocabulary  and  ar- 
rangement to  be  accounted  for  by  the  KINDS  and 
USES  of  laws  presented  and  the  journalistic  manner  of 
composition.  Thus  the  history  of  Israel  presented  to 
us  in  the  Pentateuch,  as  we  now  have  it  in  the  Bible, 
is  restored  to  the  place  of  trustworthiness ;  the  narra- 
tive is  to  be  received  at  its  face  value.  To  the  extent 
to  which  this  has  been  established  by  the  preceding 
investigations,  to  the  same  extent  does  the  time  of  the 
wilderness  wanderings  appear  to  be  the  time  of  the 
Composition  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  Moses,  either  per- 
sonally or  by  giving  directions  to  others,  its  responsible 
author. 


INDEX 

A 

Archaeological  Evidence  Concerning  Pentateuchal  Times, 
216  ff 
Concerning  peculiar  words,  phrases  and  narratives,  216J 
Concerning  literary  characteristics,  220f 
Concerning  historical  events  and  allusions,  224f 
Concerning  Tabernacle  and  furniture  and  vestments,  229f 
Concerning  eschatology  of  Pentateuch,  231f 
Concerning   Mosaic   sacrifices,   235f 

B 

Barton,  Professor  George  A.,  Criticism  of  this  Solution  of 
Pentateuchal  Problem,  271 

C 

Cities  of  Refuge,  255 
Commandments,  Mitsvah,  Mitsoth,  26 

Moral  significance,  26 

General  use  common,  26 

Less  important  part  than  other  technical  terms,  26 

The  Decalogue,  27 

Corresponding   to    Magna    Charta,    Constitution   of    United 
States,  27 

References  determining  meaning,  27 

Technical  use  less  marked,  29-34 
Composition  of  Pentateuch,  260ff 

According  to  Documentary  Theory,  261f 

According  to  New  Solution,  264f 

Time  of,  278 
Covenant 

The  Ten  Commandements,  7 

The  Whole  body  of  laws,  8 

D 

Documentary  Theory 
Outlined,  137 
Diagram  of,  141 
Comparison  with,  140  and  142 

E 

Exceptions 

Do  not  affect  the  argument,  81f 
Some  apparent,  82f 
None  real,  83 

Eschatology  of  Pentateuch,  231f 

F 
Feasts,  50 
Finn,  Dr.,  20 

285 


286  INDEX 

H 

Harmoniousness  of  Style  and  Diction  in  Divisigns  of  Pen- 
tateuch, 145ff 
Four  things  to  be  considered  in,  148-49 
Elements  of,  149 
Sources  of,  154ff 
Law  of  interpretation  of,  160f 
Law  of  consistency,  161 
Law  of  variation,  162-64 
Law  of  equilibrium,  165-66 
Historical  Difficulties,  239ff 

Of  Pentateuchal  Problem,  not  of  Documentary  Theory,  to  be 

considered,  239-40 
Considered  in  detail,  247ff 
Three  special  kinds  of,  249ff 

Different  ideas  of  different  historical  periods,  250;  the 
persons    who    might    sacrifice,    250;    the   places   of 
sacrifice,  251;  Deuteronomic  law  referring  to  Jer- 
usalem,    251-52;      Tabernacle     mentioned     before 
made,  252-53 
Different  religious  ideas  betray  later  periods,  253 
Language  betrays  different  sources,  254 
Duplicate  laws  concerning  Cities  of  Refuge,  255 
Law  of  Unity  of  Worship,  256ff 
Holiness  Code,  45ff 

J 
Judgements  a  Technical  Term,  19 
Pentateuchal  definition  of,  17 
"Judgings"  etymologically,  13 
Historical  meaning,  16 
Book  of,  11 

Typical  group  of,  14-15  and  17 
Law  of  Civil  Holidays,  Feasts,  15;   Sabbath,   15;   Sabbatic 

Year,  15 
Not  novelties,  15 
Common  law,  16 
Mala  in  se,  17-18 
System  of  courts  of,  18 
Distinguished  from  Statutes,  21,  23-25 
Moral  in  character,  24 

K 

Kautzsch,  Lit.  of  Old  Test.,  11-12,  281-82 
Kinds  of  Laws,  85 

Lists  of,  86f 
Khammurabi,  Laws  of.  Systematic,  16 

L 

Law  Books,  Journalistic  Character  of,  114 
Laws  of  Khammurabi,  16 


INDEX  287 

Langdon,  Professor  Stephen  Herbert,  105 

Legal  Terms,  1  .        ^  ^  i-j^i„,o. 

General  terms,  2 ;  Law,  meaning  of,  2 ;  any  kmd  of  law,  3 , 

torah,  2;  ddeath,  2;  khoq,  4 
Words,  dabhar,  4;  imrah,  5 

Covenant,  barith  5 ;  made  sanction  of  laws  binding,   I 
Testimony,   edah,  of   deep   ethical  import,   8;   denotes    ien 

Commandments,  9 
All  legal  terms  heretofore  regarded  as  general,  2 

'■''"^'stici'fl'lisrsoil;  of  Exodu..  361f;  Leviticus   43ff, 

Numbers,  53ff ;  Deuteronomy,  61ff ;  exceptions,  81±t 
Classification    of    with   associated   narrative   m    the    order 

of  text,  35ff 
Lists  of,  without  title,  86 

Throughout  Old  Testament,  191ff 

Value  of  evidence  of,  212 

Complete  classified  catalogue  of  lists  of,  «/it 

Literary  Forms 

Lists  gathered  together,  136-37 
Real,  but  sometimes  minimized,  119 
Confounded  with  style,  122f 
Summary,  122f 

Mnemonic,  94  ,  .    „, 

In  Code  of  Khammurabi,  94 
Poetic,  94ff 
Examples  of,  94ff 
Name  Mnemonic  justified,  103 
Descriptive  literary  form,  104 

Recognized  by  modern  criticism,  107 
Examples  of,  108ff 
Statutes,  112 
Hortatory  form,  114f 

In  Deuteronomy,  117 
Examples,  117-18 
Literary  Theories  History  of,  is  Graveyard  History,  XVII 
Literature   Repetitions  and   Discrepancies  of,   Character- 
istic OF  Pentateuchal  Times,  273 
Lyon,  Professor  D.  G.,  222 

M 
Maspero,  Professor  Gaston,  107 
Method  of  Criticism 
Archaeological,  XX 
An  investigation  of  materials,  1 

Mishpat,  Mishpatim,  13ff 

MuLLER,  Professor  W.  Max,  Egyptological  Researches,  16 


288  INDEX 

N 
Name,  Knowing  a,  253 
Narrative  Associated  With  Laws,  35 

A  literary  question,  35 

Introductory  Narrative  of  Exodus, 
Naville,  Professor  Edouard,  106 


Objections 

Not  encumbent  to  meet  all,  271 

Serious  must  be  met,  271 

That  this  solution  rests  upon  laws  only,  274 

That  assignment  of   large   portions   of  narrative  presents 

great  difficulties,  275 
How  account  for  discriminating  use  of  divine  names?  279-80 
Omission  of  Genesis  from  original  investigation,  280-81 
That  facts  of  this   solution   but  collateral   facts  of  Docu- 
mentary Theory,  282ff 

P 

Peculiarities  in  Use  of  Technical  Terms,  77-85 
Technical  terms  in  account  of  Passover,  78-79 
Appeal  of  Zelophehad's  daughters,  79-81 

Pentateuch 

Many  aspects  of  the  Problem  of,  XV 
.  Acceptance  at  face  value  a  logical  necessity  in  any  original 
investigation,  XIX 
Literary  characteristics  of,  223f 
Composition  of,  259ff 

Solution  by  Documentary  Theory,  261ff 
A  new  solution,  264ff 

Pentateuchal  Times,  Archaeological  Evidence  Concerning, 

216ff 
Problem  of  the  Pentateuch 

First  interrogative  of,  XVI 

Solution  of,  a  posteriori,  XVI 

A  posteriori  solution  of,  XVIII 

Solution  by  facts,  XVIII 


Results  of  Investigations 

A  surprise,  XX 

Presented  in  order  of  development,  XXI 

Summary  of,  142-44  and  283 
Ritual,  Ancient  Sumerian,  105 


S 
Sabbath,  Law  of,  a  Judgment,  15 


INDEX  289 

Sabbatic  Year,  Law  of,  A  Judgment,  15 
Sacrifices,  Mosaic,  234ff 
ScoviLLE,  Samuel,  Jr.,  Esq.,  XIII 
Scribes,  Ancient  Use  of,  158f 
Statutes,   khoq,  khuqqah,  khuqqim,  20 

A  "decree"  a  "direction  given"  20 

Meaning  of,  22 

Mala  prohibita,  20 

Distinguished  from  judgments,  21  and  23-25 

Moral  character  of,  24 

Typical  list  of,  21-22 

Like  Prayerbook  rubrics,  27 

Direction  for  detection  of  leprosy,  45 

LaAvs  of  consanguinity,  46 

Holiness  Code,  45ff 

Feasts,  50 
Statutes  of  Judgment 

Zelophehad's  daughters,  57f 

Cities  of  Refuge,  59-60 

Without  title,  87 

Complete  list  of,  92 
Style,  12  Off 

Difference  between  Form  and  Style,  121ff 

Personal  property,  121 

Influence  of  subject  on,  124f 

Sources  of,  126-28 

Marks  of,  169ff 

"Genuine  characteristics"  according  to  Oxford  Hexateuch, 
170f 

Important  marks  not  "genuine  characteristics,"  178ff 
SuMERiAN  Ritual,  105 

T 

Tabernacle  and  Furniture  and  Directions  for,  38-43 
Ceremonial  law  in,  43-44 
Egyptian  pattern  of  Tabernacle,  229ff 
Said  to  be  mentioned  before  made,  252 
With  furniture,  229-30 

V 

Vocabulary,  12  Off  and  148ff 

W 

Wiener,  Harold  M.,  Esq.,  93 


PUBLICATIONS  OF  BIBLIOTHECA  SACRA  COMPANY 


Every  Minister 
Every  Bible  Student  and 
Every  Christian  Worker 
SHOULD  read 

BIBLIOTHECA  SACRA 

A  Religous  and  Sociological  Quarterly.    Editor,  G.  Frederick  Wright. 
$3.00  a  year. 

G.  FREDERICK  WRIGHT 

THE  ICE  AGE  IN  NORTH   AMERICA,  AND   ITS    BEARINGS   UPON 
THE  ANTIQUITY  OF  MAN.     6th  Edition.     210  illustrations.     808  pages. 
Svo,  cloth,  $6.00,  postpaid. 
SCIENTIFIC  CONFIRMATION  OF  OLD  TESTAMENT  HISTORY. 

3d  Edition.      40  illustrations.      450  pages.      12mo,  cloth,  $2.00,  postpaid. 

ORIGIN  AND  ANTIQUITY  OF  MAN.     Many  illustrations.     550  pages. 

12mo,  cloth,  $2.00,  postpaid. 

STORY  OF  MY  LIFE  AND  WORK.       476  pages.       12mo,    cloth,  $2.00, 

postpaid. 

SEE  OHIO  FIRST.    93  pages.    Svo,  paper,  60  cents,  postpaid. 

HAROLD  M,  WEINER 

ESSAYS  IN  PENTATEUCHAL  CRITICISM.  255  pages.  Svo,  cloth, 
$1.50,  postpaid. 

The  Coup  de  Grace  to  Wellhausen  Critics. 

THE  ORIGIN  OF  THE  PENTATEUCH.  150  pages.  Svo,  paper,  40 
cents,  postpaid. 

A  Comprehensive  Answer  to  the  Wellhausen  Critics. 
PENTATEUCHAL  STUDIES.       350  pages.      Svo,  cloth,  $2.00,  postpaid. 
The  Wellhausen  Critics  in  extremis. 

THE  DATE  OF  THE  EXODUS.  27  pages.  Svo,  paper,  20  cents,  post- 
paid. 

THE  RELIGION  OF  MOSES.  36  pages,  Svo,  paper,  25  cents,  postpaid. 
THE  MAIN  PROBLEM  OF  DEUTERONOMY.  37  pages,  Svo,  paper, 
25  cents,  postpaid. 

MELVIN  GROVE  KYLE 

THE  DECIDING  VOICE  OF  THE  MONUMENTS  IN  BIBLICAL  CRIT- 
ICISM.   325  pages.     Svo,  cloth,  $1.65,  postpaid. 

MOSES  AND  THE  MONUMENTS.  300  pages.  Svo,  cloth,  $2.15,  post- 
paid. 

THE  PROBLEM  OF  THE  PENTATEUCH.  312  pages.  8vo,  cloth,  $2.15, 
postpaid. 

JOHN  ELLIOTT  WISHART 

THE  SPIRITS  OF  JUST  MEN  MADE  PERFECT.  178  pages.  12mo, 
cloth,  $1.00,  postpaid. 

BECAUSE 

1.  They  are  all  the  works  of  experts. 

2.  They  are  all  abreast  of  the  time. 

3.  Their  style  is  so  simple  and  clear  that  they  are  adapted 

to  the  wants  of  laymen  as  well  as  those  of  scholars. 

4.  They  uphold  orthodox  systems  of  doctrine. 


BIBLIOTHECA  SACRA  COMPANY,  Oberlin,  Ohio,  U.  S.  A. 


/ 


